Jump to content

Don't use my cache for your challenge!


DavidMac
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

Sometime in the recent past, a cache hider in my "extended" caching area posted the following to all of their cache listings. I don't want to single them out or give away their name as that's not the point (and I request that posters refrain from doing so), but here's the text:

 

As of January 1st 2009, all of my caches will be exempt from logging for challenges, games, series or other bookmarked nonsense dragging down the game. I will delete any finds assocoated (sic) with this.

 

Thing is, I have found several of their caches within the last few years (before the listings were appended) and they are required for me to qualify for at least one challenge that I'm working on. For sake of discussion, would you:

 

- Respect the cache owner's wishes and backtrack to those areas to find other caches which satisfy the challenge?

- Ignore the request and submit their caches toward the challenge requirements anyway?

- As a challenge owner, allow (or not allow) people to count these caches toward your challenge?

 

Is a cache owner even in the right to request such a thing and enforce it through log deletions, or could this be considered a form of ALR (I'm assuming here that the CO is referring to "found for the ** challenge" copy and paste logs)? Has anybody ever had a log actually deleted over such a request?

Link to comment

For the most part - how would they even know?? Unless you added it to a public bookmark list as part of the challenge. That must be the problem - they are sick of see the challenge bookmarks on thier caches.

 

I don't think any individual cachers should have the right to do that - it makes it a kind of ALR - the addtional requirement being - no challenge cache bookmarks or mentions in logs.

Link to comment

Sounds to me like deleting found it logs may violate the no ALR guidelines.

 

Pardon my ignorance, but what are the "no ALR guidelines", and what does ALR mean? It appears I'm behind on my geogeekspeek. :rolleyes:

ALR=Addtional Logging Requirements=something extra (other than finding the cache and signing the logbook) you have to do before logging online

 

No longer allowed by a recent gudieline change. Owners cannot delete logs that do not conform.

Link to comment

Sounds to me like deleting found it logs may violate the no ALR guidelines.

 

Pardon my ignorance, but what are the "no ALR guidelines", and what does ALR mean? It appears I'm behind on my geogeekspeek. :rolleyes:

 

Additional Logging Requirement - Having to do something in addition to signing the log book to be able to claim a Found it.

Link to comment

Sounds to me like deleting found it logs may violate the no ALR guidelines.

 

Pardon my ignorance, but what are the "no ALR guidelines", and what does ALR mean? It appears I'm behind on my geogeekspeek. :rolleyes:

 

Since you just introduced me to the word, "Frumious", ALR means Additional Logging Requirements... caches that required you to do something before you could log a find (simplified definition).

 

Main Entry: frumious

Part of Speech: adj

Definition: fuming and furious

Etymology: invented by Lewis Carroll as blend of fuming and furious

Link to comment

I think Groundspeak also has the ability to restore your deleted log and locking it so the CO cannot continue to delete it. You might have to supply some sort of picture to prove you truly did sign the log.

 

I would hope the CO would back off before that would be necessary.

Link to comment

Pardon my ignorance, but what are the "no ALR guidelines", and what does ALR mean? It appears I'm behind on my geogeekspeek.

Since you just introduced me to the word, "Frumious", ALR means Additional Logging Requirements... caches that required you to do something before you could log a find (simplified definition).

 

Main Entry: frumious

Part of Speech: adj

Definition: fuming and furious

Etymology: invented by Lewis Carroll as blend of fuming and furious

Why is Jane so frumious?

Link to comment

If the CO doesn't want me to add his cache to a bookmark list I would be happy to respect his/her wishes.

 

However, using his cache to meet the requirements of a challenge cache is none of his business since it doesn't impact their cache in any way. I've never done a challenge cache, but some of the ones I've seen can require some very odd combination of caches.

Link to comment

Sometime in the recent past, a cache hider in my "extended" caching area posted the following to all of their cache listings. I don't want to single them out or give away their name as that's not the point (and I request that posters refrain from doing so), but here's the text:

 

Since we share the same extended range*, could you PM me the cacher's name so I can add them to my ignore list? That way I'm proactively adhering to their "rule" and avoiding the drama of having to deal with them.

 

*GC10JN2 is in my top 5 favorite Earthcaches.

Link to comment

Sometime in the recent past, a cache hider in my "extended" caching area posted the following to all of their cache listings. I don't want to single them out or give away their name as that's not the point (and I request that posters refrain from doing so), but here's the text:

 

As of January 1st 2009, all of my caches will be exempt from logging for challenges, games, series or other bookmarked nonsense dragging down the game. I will delete any finds assocoated (sic) with this.

 

Thing is, I have found several of their caches within the last few years (before the listings were appended) and they are required for me to qualify for at least one challenge that I'm working on. For sake of discussion, would you:

 

- Respect the cache owner's wishes and backtrack to those areas to find other caches which satisfy the challenge?

- Ignore the request and submit their caches toward the challenge requirements anyway?

- As a challenge owner, allow (or not allow) people to count these caches toward your challenge?

 

Is a cache owner even in the right to request such a thing and enforce it through log deletions, or could this be considered a form of ALR (I'm assuming here that the CO is referring to "found for the ** challenge" copy and paste logs)? Has anybody ever had a log actually deleted over such a request?

It looks to me like the cache owner just used inaccurate language. He's really just asking that finders don't clutter his cache pages with bookmarks. But even though he can delete the log, he can't delete the bookmark! Which raises another question. What recourse does a cache owner have if he feels a bookmark is inappropriate? For instance, I have been tempted to start a bookmark list call "caches where the owner has deleted my log because he didn't like what I said." I could then copy my log into the notes for the bookmark.

Link to comment

Why would any cache owner be bothered by bookmarks? Any cache page only shows the first... what is it? two or three. After that there's the link to show the rest. Nothing "cluttered" about it. I have a strong dislike of the so-called "challenge" caches, but I sure wouldn't handle it that way!

Link to comment

Why would any cache owner be bothered by bookmarks? Any cache page only shows the first... what is it? two or three. After that there's the link to show the rest. Nothing "cluttered" about it. I have a strong dislike of the so-called "challenge" caches, but I sure wouldn't handle it that way!

 

I think it's a protest of some kind.

Link to comment

Why would any cache owner be bothered by bookmarks? Any cache page only shows the first... what is it? two or three. After that there's the link to show the rest. Nothing "cluttered" about it. I have a strong dislike of the so-called "challenge" caches, but I sure wouldn't handle it that way!

 

I have a bookmark called "Lame Caches Not Worth Finding". It is a private list but I imagine a CO would not be too happy if that showed up on his page.

Link to comment

Why would any cache owner be bothered by bookmarks? Any cache page only shows the first... what is it? two or three. After that there's the link to show the rest. Nothing "cluttered" about it. I have a strong dislike of the so-called "challenge" caches, but I sure wouldn't handle it that way!

 

I have a bookmark called "Lame Caches Not Worth Finding". It is a private list but I imagine a CO would not be too happy if that showed up on his page.

 

:rolleyes: Yeah, you're probably right, but I don't hide Lame Caches that are Not Worth Finding.

Link to comment

Frumious is from one of my favorite poems. Note Carroll also coined the word 'whiffle' which is where the name for the Whiffle Ball came from. And of course the kid's TV show Jabberwocky.

 

JABBERWOCKY

-Lewis Carroll

 

`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves

Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:

All mimsy were the borogoves,

And the mome raths outgrabe.

 

"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!

The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!

Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun

The frumious Bandersnatch!"

 

.....

Link to comment

If the CO doesn't want me to add his cache to a bookmark list I would be happy to respect his/her wishes.

 

However, using his cache to meet the requirements of a challenge cache is none of his business since it doesn't impact their cache in any way....

 

The person who's now annoyed at having their cache used (without their permission most likely) as part of a challenge rather disproves this theory.

Link to comment

...What gives him the right?...

 

What gives him the right? Good question. The answer is they both own and are responsible for their cache. Not this site, not the challenge cache owner, not the finders.

 

Had the challenge cache owner showed a tad of respect and asked and honored whatever answer came out of that, this petty problem would not exist.

 

To be fair I once used two other caches coords as part of a puzzle. It would have been interesting if they would have complained.

 

Personally I think challenge caches should have been banned with ALR's and instead this site (or another site) deveoped caching achievment badges that just show up in your profile automaticly if you meet the challenge (whatever it is). Then it would just be built into the system. I'm not sure if it would solve the problem but I do think it would make it less likely to crop up.

Link to comment

Sounds to me like deleting found it logs may violate the no ALR guidelines.

 

True.

 

It also seems that challenge owners (& other bookmarked nosence dragging down the game) not

asking permission for the use of other peoples caches as an integral part of their own caching experience is proving to be a problem as well.

 

Could you explain the harm done to a CO by these bookmark games? I've never done any challenge caches so perhaps there is something I'm missing.

Link to comment
What's so hard about responding with "Okay" to his request and going with the boy's wishes, whatever we may think of them? :rolleyes:

What I think of the wishes are not charitable, but if I am faced with the situation I would go along with them. Life is too short and unfound caches too many to have to fight it.

Link to comment

...What gives him the right?...

 

What gives him the right? Good question. The answer is they both own and are responsible for their cache. Not this site, not the challenge cache owner, not the finders.

 

Had the challenge cache owner showed a tad of respect and asked and honored whatever answer came out of that, this petty problem would not exist.

 

The challenge caches that come to mind require getting 1 cache in every quadrant in an area or getting 1 cache of every difficulty rating at a particular terrain rating. It's simply not practical for the CO to ask permission from every other CO in the state/region/etc.

 

To be fair I once used two other caches coords as part of a puzzle. It would have been interesting if they would have complained.

 

That is a tad rude... :rolleyes:

Link to comment

 

Personally I think challenge caches should have been banned with ALR's and instead this site (or another site) deveoped caching achievment badges that just show up in your profile automaticly if you meet the challenge (whatever it is). Then it would just be built into the system. I'm not sure if it would solve the problem but I do think it would make it less likely to crop up.

I tend to agree. I kinda regret posting the challenge caches that I own and have considered archiving them. I had no idea they'd be so popular though, so there would be some backlash if I nuked them.

Link to comment

Interesting semantical questification! ALRs ask you to do something, in order to qualify for logging the cache: Wear a tin-foil hat. Bow twice towards Seattle... Does asking you NOT to do something qualify as asking you to DO something??

The New Jersey DeLorme Challenge requires finding one cache on each page in the New Jersey DeLorme Atlas. (This does not include the one cache in New Jersey that is/was not on any DeLorme page.) Page 52 had two caches listed when we searched. One was missing, and archived after our visit. That leaves one cache possible for that page. If the owner of that cache (who seems currently to be oblivious to the DeLorme Challenge) chose to delete any log that bookmarked the cache for the challenge, no one would be able to find the final until another cache were hidden on that page.

Curious problem.

Link to comment

 

True.

 

It also seems that challenge owners (& other bookmarked nosence dragging down the game) not

asking permission for the use of other peoples caches as an integral part of their own caching experience is proving to be a problem as well.

Let's set aside the issue of bookmarks for a moment and point out how many shades of gray there are in this.

 

If I create an "A to Z" challenge cache where you have to come up with a collection of 26 traditionals whose Groundspeak names start with the letters A to Z, and unless I put out 26 or more such caches myself, it is inevitable that to meet the challenge, other caches will be used.

 

So what?

 

Took me a while to get the Q and Z logged, but it was fun.

Link to comment

Wow! I had not idea that so many people disliked challenge caches!

 

I love them. How do they "drag down" the game? They are a great way to group together certain types of caches that interest certain types of cachers. It's like a badge of honor to find all of the "scuba diving caches" for example.

 

If you don't like them, why not simply ignore them?

 

Why do we have to "ban" everything that a few people don't like?

 

In what way do challenge caches hurt anything?

 

I consider more bookmarks on my cache pages to be an honor. In general, QUALITY caches have more bookmarks on them than junky caches. When I am picking out caches to hunt for, I am more likely to look for caches that have lots of book marks because many times these are pretty good caches, or older caches, or memorable in some way.

Edited by GrnXnham
Link to comment

 

If you don't like them, why not simply ignore them?

 

 

That's how I'm treating them right now.

 

I don't ever see being dedicated enough to do a number of the map-based challenges. I might get the "1 of each difficulty level for terrain 1.5" cache that is in my area, but it might be a long time from now.

Link to comment

...What gives him the right?...

 

What gives him the right? Good question. The answer is they both own and are responsible for their cache. Not this site, not the challenge cache owner, not the finders.

 

Had the challenge cache owner showed a tad of respect and asked and honored whatever answer came out of that, this petty problem would not exist.

 

The challenge caches that come to mind require getting 1 cache in every quadrant in an area or getting 1 cache of every difficulty rating at a particular terrain rating. It's simply not practical for the CO to ask permission from every other CO in the state/region/etc.

 

To be fair I once used two other caches coords as part of a puzzle. It would have been interesting if they would have complained.

 

That is a tad rude... :rolleyes:

 

Both good points. :mad:

Link to comment

Sounds to me like deleting found it logs may violate the no ALR guidelines.

 

True.

 

It also seems that challenge owners (& other bookmarked nosence dragging down the game) not

asking permission for the use of other peoples caches as an integral part of their own caching experience is proving to be a problem as well.

 

Could you explain the harm done to a CO by these bookmark games? I've never done any challenge caches so perhaps there is something I'm missing.

 

Harm? I suspect that it's all mental anguish for those who notice. You could put a notice on your cache/log, "No cache owners were harmed in completing this challenge cache."

 

If you keep in mind that the NPS and other's want to control even Virtual caches, you can picture how some onwers feel when their cache is part of something else, even if you can't grock exactly why they feel that way.

Link to comment

i've done exactly ONE challenge cache i thought was worth the effort.

 

the delorme challenges were kind of cool in the same way as the first LPCs were kind of cool. now that we have a proliferation of challenges of every possible configuration, they're tiresome.

 

it is not necessary to make a public bookmark for your challenge, so how would the CO know to delete your log otherwise?

Link to comment

...What gives him the right?...

 

What gives him the right? Good question. The answer is they both own and are responsible for their cache. Not this site, not the challenge cache owner, not the finders.

 

Had the challenge cache owner showed a tad of respect and asked and honored whatever answer came out of that, this petty problem would not exist.

 

The challenge caches that come to mind require getting 1 cache in every quadrant in an area or getting 1 cache of every difficulty rating at a particular terrain rating. It's simply not practical for the CO to ask permission from every other CO in the state/region/etc.

 

Being a cacher for only a year now I'm only aware of challenge caches like the DeLorme, state counties, an ABC challenge, I-35, I-29. These challenges only require finding a cache within a regions following a set of cryteria/rules, not a specific set of caches. These challenges are a little different in respect to having a challenge to go find specific caches by specific cache owners. I'm kind of on the line of agree/disagree that a cache ower should make a big deal of their caches being used for that kind of challenge (specific caches) unless the challenge cache owner added info to the second party cache without permission. In that case I totally agree with the offended cacher. If nothing was altered in/on/too/ect. their cache then why not take it as an honor that your cache was choosen as part of a challenge. If non of these things were done to his/her cache then I think they are just being stuffy.

 

For those of you that don't like challenge caches... In remarkes to the DeLorme, County, Interstate challenges... you don't know what your missing. I've been to many places in my state because of them that I would have never seen/discovered if it wasn't for the challenge and geocaching.

Link to comment

I love challenge caches as my profile shows I've visited every corner of Minnesota thrice. But there ARE SOME lame challenges. But that doesn't mean the CO has to take drastic measures. I think deleting the logs of bookmark owners is just plain childish.

 

I happen to like the attention bookmarks bring to my caches. If anything, it helps increase traffic.

Link to comment
Had the challenge cache owner showed a tad of respect and asked and honored whatever answer came out of that, this petty problem would not exist.

 

Petty problem or petty cache owner? I think the latter. I place my caches to be found. The reason people choose my to find my caches is really none of my business.

 

If someone places logging restrictions on his cache (other than challenge caches), it's an ALR and no longer allowed. End of story.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Call me crazy but I like it when my cache becomes part of some game. Many of the logs beat the tar out of TFTC SL.

 

I try to avoid naming my caches with names that start with "The" or "A". I do that to try and help out the people trying to find the alphabet. I can't really imagine someone not wanting their cache to be book marked.

Link to comment
For sake of discussion, would you:

 

- Respect the cache owner's wishes and backtrack to those areas to find other caches which satisfy the challenge?

- Ignore the request and submit their caches toward the challenge requirements anyway?

 

I would use the cache anyway, unless it were quite convenient for me to use another. I'd create a shared bookmarked list (not public) and attach the URL to my log of the challenge cache. The challenge cache owner could see my list by following the URL, and this cache owner would never know, and hence not be discomfited in the slightest.

 

- As a challenge owner, allow (or not allow) people to count these caches toward your challenge?

 

Yes, I'd allow these caches to count towards my challenge. The cache owner is trying to enforce an ALR, he can't. He can request no public bookmarked lists, please. But he can't enforce that, either.

 

He's trying to dictate why people seek his cache!

 

I can understand being annoyed with logs like, "needed a Whatever for the Whatever Challenge, so stopped and did this. TFTC." It relegates his hide to a mere stepping stone to another and is rude. But there again, he can't expect that his cache is going to be exempt from clumsy logging by cachers.

Link to comment

 

For those of you that don't like challenge caches... In remarkes to the DeLorme, County, Interstate challenges... you don't know what your (sic) missing. I've been to many places in my state because of them that I would have never seen/discovered if it wasn't for the challenge and geocaching.

 

i don't know what i'm missing?

 

are we assuming now that because i have done a thing and don't like it that i simply don't know how swell it is?

Link to comment

Why would any cache owner be bothered by bookmarks? Any cache page only shows the first... what is it? two or three. After that there's the link to show the rest. Nothing "cluttered" about it. I have a strong dislike of the so-called "challenge" caches, but I sure wouldn't handle it that way!

 

I have a bookmark called "Lame Caches Not Worth Finding". It is a private list but I imagine a CO would not be too happy if that showed up on his page.

Phew!!! That's not me on the list... :laughing:

Link to comment
Personally I think challenge caches should have been banned with ALR's and instead this site (or another site) deveoped caching achievment badges that just show up in your profile automaticly if you meet the challenge (whatever it is). Then it would just be built into the system. I'm not sure if it would solve the problem but I do think it would make it less likely to crop up.
I tend to agree. I kinda regret posting the challenge caches that I own and have considered archiving them. I had no idea they'd be so popular though, so there would be some backlash if I nuked them.

Yep, any time one bans an entire group of somethings and then makes certain exceptions there's going to be a problem. ALRs and challenge caches. Just like virts and Earth Caches.

 

Had the challenge cache owner showed a tad of respect and asked and honored whatever answer came out of that, this petty problem would not exist.
Petty problem or petty cache owner? I think the latter. I place my caches to be found. The reason people choose my to find my caches is really none of my business.

 

If someone places logging restrictions on his cache (other than challenge caches), it's an ALR and no longer allowed. End of story.

I tend to agree. If the logbook is signed, it's a find with few exceptions.

 

However, I don't place caches just to be found. I placed them to be enjoyed. Minor, but important, difference.

 

Here's the thing, like BS, I place caches to be found and enjoyed. I don't like when one of our caches is simply a tick on some list. Many of the folks who pursue challenge caches treat caches as simply a stepping stone to something else. I personally feel walked on. Not a feeling I like. I know this feeling because for a long time we had the only cache on one page of the SC Delorme Challenge. (Fortunately someone came along and placed a few easier caches. Now the visits are back down to the previous levels.)

 

I felt this way the first time I heard about cache machines. I didn't like the idea of mass caching, but the reason I placed the restriction on our caches against cache machines is many of our caches are in areas that are slightly sensitive. They can handle light traffic, but not the kind that a cache machine would produce.

 

So, just like the organizers of cache machines, a challenge cache owner should respect the wishes of cache owners to not include their caches in challenges. It would be a lot easier for the challenge owner to issue that challenge than the cache owner to enforce the restriction. (Which he could no longer do anyway without simply archiving the cache.)

Link to comment
all of my caches will be exempt from logging for challenges, games, series or other bookmarked nonsense

Well, that seems pretty odd. I've never encountered anything like that, but I reckon it takes all kinds.

If there were alternate means of completing the challenge, I would respect the cache owner's wishes.

If there cache was the only way I could achieve my goal, Isonzo Kart's method might work.

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 4
×
×
  • Create New...