Jump to content

Armchair caching


9Key

Recommended Posts

I've had a very tough puzzle on my watchlist for a few years and recently is was logged as a find. The finder remarked that the online logger before him did not sign the paper log. The cache owner then responsed with a log stating that it was a "remote find". I posted asking for a definition of "remote find". Here is his overly wordy response:

 

Sometimes, smart people become really interested in a puzzle, especially if it is a challenging puzzle. And that is not limited to people who just live in the immediate area of the puzzle. People seek out the mental challenges, and they look all over for them, outside their neighborhood to other neighborhoods. And cities. And states.

For example, CowSpots from Arizona does it. As does sleuthers from Colorado. ...just a couple of examples.

 

Now me, myself, when I hide a puzzle, when the puzzle is not integrated with the hide itself but is just a puzzle on the cache page, I make the physical hide a no-brainer. A light pole in a parking lot! A guardrail at the end of the road! An insta-find! A guarantee-find!

 

Except there are exceptions to that... There are sometimes when you want to pair up puzzle difficulty and hide difficulty. But for 50% or so of those puzzles out there, at least mine, the fun and challenge is in solving the puzzle, and the physical find is a formality. That really applies especially with the difficult puzzles. Who wants to spend hours solving a tough puzzle, only to visit the location and dnf? So that is another reason why they are formalities. You get my drift...

 

So anyway, considering all that and getting to "remote logging". It is a practice that quite a few geocachers have practiced. I have already given you examples. It works like this... ...a geocacher from far away solves a puzzle, establishes the correct coordinates, confirms the coordinates with the owner, but since that geocacher is stuck hundreds of miles away and can't drive up to the light pole skirt in the parking lot, the owner, knowing that the physical hide is a light skirt in the back corner of Wal-Mart, says "he did it - he can log the cache."

 

Yes, I know, there will be those of you that say "who cares what others do" and "to each his own", but I think this is a lame practice at the very least. Its a very slippery slope to me. If you're willing to "remote log" (not sign the log book) on puzzles what's next? Logging find on a traditional 5/5 cache because you drove by the area?

Link to comment

I've had a very tough puzzle on my watchlist for a few years and recently is was logged as a find. The finder remarked that the online logger before him did not sign the paper log. The cache owner then responsed with a log stating that it was a "remote find". I posted asking for a definition of "remote find". Here is his overly wordy response:

 

Sometimes, smart people become really interested in a puzzle, especially if it is a challenging puzzle. And that is not limited to people who just live in the immediate area of the puzzle. People seek out the mental challenges, and they look all over for them, outside their neighborhood to other neighborhoods. And cities. And states.

For example, CowSpots from Arizona does it. As does sleuthers from Colorado. ...just a couple of examples.

 

Now me, myself, when I hide a puzzle, when the puzzle is not integrated with the hide itself but is just a puzzle on the cache page, I make the physical hide a no-brainer. A light pole in a parking lot! A guardrail at the end of the road! An insta-find! A guarantee-find!

 

Except there are exceptions to that... There are sometimes when you want to pair up puzzle difficulty and hide difficulty. But for 50% or so of those puzzles out there, at least mine, the fun and challenge is in solving the puzzle, and the physical find is a formality. That really applies especially with the difficult puzzles. Who wants to spend hours solving a tough puzzle, only to visit the location and dnf? So that is another reason why they are formalities. You get my drift...

 

So anyway, considering all that and getting to "remote logging". It is a practice that quite a few geocachers have practiced. I have already given you examples. It works like this... ...a geocacher from far away solves a puzzle, establishes the correct coordinates, confirms the coordinates with the owner, but since that geocacher is stuck hundreds of miles away and can't drive up to the light pole skirt in the parking lot, the owner, knowing that the physical hide is a light skirt in the back corner of Wal-Mart, says "he did it - he can log the cache."

 

Yes, I know, there will be those of you that say "who cares what others do" and "to each his own", but I think this is a lame practice at the very least. Its a very slippery slope to me. If you're willing to "remote log" (not sign the log book) on puzzles what's next? Logging find on a traditional 5/5 cache because you drove by the area?

 

Well, I certainly find it lame. I enjoy doing puzzles here but would never do that, especially when right on the getting started page are the following:

 

Easy Steps to Geocaching

 

1. The Complete Idiot's Guide to Geocaching, Second Edition

2. Register for a free membership.

3. Click "Hide & Seek a Cache."

4. Enter your postal code and click "search."

5. Choose any geocache from the list and click on its name.

6. Enter the coordinates of the geocache into your GPS Device.

7. Use your GPS device to assist you in finding the hidden geocache.

8. Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location.

9. Share your geocaching stories and photos online.

 

It seems they have skipped at least steps 6, 7, 8. It never ceases to amaze me the excuses people will use to get a smiley when they have not found the actual cache.

 

Then again, as you said, people play this game however they want to and it certainly is not up to me to tell them how to play it.

Edited by jhauser42
Link to comment

Then again, as you said, people play this game however they want to and it certainly is not up to me to tell them how to play it.

Yet you just did.

 

There are some difficult puzzles near me, some unsolved for quite a long time. I may pair up with someone who likes to solve puzzles but does not live near here... he or she solves the puzzle and confirms the coordinates, then I go find the cache and sign for both of us as a team effort.

 

Owners are of course free to delete such a log, but I seriously doubt the owners of these puzzles will care. They're all friends of mine whom I will see at a dinner I am hosting tonight... I will ask them.

 

As far as a "remote find" where nobody actually finds and signs the cache, no.

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

This is a geocaching website where the entire point of the sport is to find geocaches. For those who are just interested in solving puzzles there are websites for that. He can try www.passionforpuzzles.com.

 

Phony found it logs logs, and that is what this is, are not harmless. He complains about the possibility of going to the cache site after solving the puzzle only to log a DNF. That is part of geocaching. If the cache is actually missing, his found it log will be misleading and can cause others to waste their time on the cache and might give the owner the false impression that all is well with his cache.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
So anyway, considering all that and getting to "remote logging". It is a practice that quite a few geocachers have practiced. I have already given you examples. It works like this... ...a geocacher from far away solves a puzzle, establishes the correct coordinates, confirms the coordinates with the owner, but since that geocacher is stuck hundreds of miles away and can't drive up to the light pole skirt in the parking lot, the owner, knowing that the physical hide is a light skirt in the back corner of Wal-Mart, says "he did it - he can log the cache."
Or he could add the remote puzzle cache to his "Solved Unfound Puzzles" bookmark list, and drop by to find the cache if he ever happens to be in the area.
Link to comment

Since the cache owner is perfectly happy letting that find stand, I can't imagine why I should be concerned.

Kinda figured you would chime in with that dribble. :D The problem him doing this in my area is that several of us have had to add text to our caches stating that the the log must be signed. Why should I have to do this? Like a previous poster said, the guidelines clearly state "sign the log".

Link to comment

If you're willing to "remote log" (not sign the log book) on puzzles what's next? Logging find on a traditional 5/5 cache because you drove by the area?

This is a bit of a strawman. The hider of a puzzle cache who spent more time developing a puzzle to challenge those who like solving them than they did hiding the cache may decide to allow "remote finds". I suppose a cache owner could hide a 5 terrain (but not a 5/5) cache because he wants to get people to scuba dive or skydive and allows anyone who goes scuba or skydiving to log the cache, but that seems unlikely.

 

Given the decision by Groundspeak to threaten to archive virtual caches where the owner is allowing "coach potato" logs, I have little doubt that Grounspeak would likely agree that remote logging of puzzles is not the intended purpose of the Geocaching.com online "Found It" log. Someone who solves a difficult puzzle has done no more than someone who has figured out the answer to a verification question for a virtual.

 

I personally don't agree with Groundspeak's decision on virtuals and I would not like them to begin to threaten puzzle caches with archival if they allow remote finds, but this seems to be the way they are leaning.

 

People use the "Found It" log for a variety of reasons. It seems to bother some "puritans" who want there to be only one reason to use the "Found It" log - that is that you signed the physical log in the cache. Since there is no competition, it shouldn't make any difference that someone logs a "Found It" online for some silly reason we don't agree with. I really don't care if someone wants to increment their find count for solving puzzles or answering questions about virtuals without actually visiting the cache. It is only when this interferes with someone being able to go and find the cache that it is a problem. If the log indicates this is an armchair log then I know that it is not confirming whether the cache is there or not, and can make my decision whether to go look based on this. It seems rare that an armchair log would actually result in a cacher "wasting time" to look for something that isn't even there.

 

I recently saw a bunch of armchair logs on a puzzle cache that was archived. Upon archiving the cache the owner allowed people who had solved the puzzle but hadn't gotten to the location to find it to claim a find. I had the solution, but didn't take the owner up on this offer. I'm not sure what I think of the those that did, but these finds certainly don't affect me in any way. If a reviewer were to archive a puzzle because the cache owner was allowing armchair logs, however, that could effect me. If the owner (or someone else) removes the cache because it is now archived I would not be able to find it.

Link to comment
Or he could add the remote puzzle cache to his "Solved Unfound Puzzles" bookmark list, and drop by to find the cache if he ever happens to be in the area.

That's what I do...not the bookmark list, but I'll post a note saying I solved the puzzle and hope to find it someday. I have a ton of solved puzzles in GSAK that I'm hoping to find if I'm ever in the area...now to convince my wife we need to take some road trips across the country. :D

 

The only trouble is that puzzles sometimes change, so you have to check to make sure the final coords are the same as when you solved it.

Link to comment

Sheesh, not long ago the debate was usually over whether it was OK to log a find when you hunted, but didn't find the cache. Now it's over whether it's OK to log a find on a geocache if didn't even go geocaching. Just when you think things can't get more absurd, someone proves you wrong.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Since the cache owner is perfectly happy letting that find stand, I can't imagine why I should be concerned.

Kinda figured you would chime in with that dribble. :D The problem him doing this in my area is that several of us have had to add text to our caches stating that the the log must be signed. Why should I have to do this? Like a previous poster said, the guidelines clearly state "sign the log".

The guidelines say that if you sign the log you can log a Found It online. They don't say that to log a Found It on line you must sign the log. If the log isn't signed however a cache owner can easily say they are deleting a bogus or counterfeit log. sbell111 is not saying that you shouldn't delete online logs on your puzzle if the the person didn't actually find the cache and sign the log, what he is saying is that if another cache owner chooses to allow remote finds you shouldn't be concerned. You can still delete logs on your cache (whether or not you added text saying as much).

Link to comment

I think Toz is onto something. There may be a point where allowing found logs on a puzzle cache where the cache has not been found makes that cache into a de facto armchair virtual, and will get it archived. I don't know where that point is, however. If the cache is mostly being actually found in the field, the occasional "remote find" is not likely be an issue.

 

Re TARs post, if George solves the puzzle and George and I go caching, we both sign the log and log the find. Some puzzle cache owners are unhappy about this, I know. That I did no puzzle solving work, but just tagged along with the guy with the brains. But I DID sign the log. That's not the same thing as George solves puzzle, emails owner with correct solution and logs find without even hunting cache. (I don't by the way, log puzzles that I haven't solved; I just ignore the entire category, for the most part).

Link to comment
Sometimes, smart people become really interested in a puzzle, especially if it is a challenging puzzle. And that is not limited to people who just live in the immediate area of the puzzle. People seek out the mental challenges, and they look all over for them, outside their neighborhood to other neighborhoods. And cities. And states.

For example, CowSpots from Arizona does it. As does sleuthers from Colorado. ...just a couple of examples.

 

Cow Spots occasionally looks at puzzles from afar for mental stimulation, you betcha. Found some great puzzle cache creators throughout that way. And through emailing these folks back and forth over the years, I've found several cachers who've been kind enough to play-test some of my puzzles and vice versa. (Which I wish more puzzlers would do -- can't tell you how many times I've caught blatant mistakes or multiple solutions which render something unsolvable.)

 

Rarely have I had the good fortune to have actually gone and found any of these in the field, unless I'm already making a trip to the area. I've from Tucson, and I have managed to get a bunch in San Diego (including a first find, yay!), some in Minnesota. But most of the time I'm content to work 'em out from the relative comfort of the blast furnace that is Southern Arizona.

 

Since the topic is remote finds, IMHO, that's lame. Back in the day, I sometimes used to post a note that I'd solved it, but I think I've since outgrown that. It is up to the conscience of the individual cache owner, but I'll wipe any finds on the cache page that don't have a matching signature on the logsheet. And have already done so in the past.

Edited by Cow Spots
Link to comment

If you want to solve a puzzle, but not physically get out and find the cache. That OK with me, but don't claim it as a 'find'. Post a note that you solved the puzzle. If it,s a new cache and no one has logged a find, you can log a NOTE as FTS First to Solve.

The OWNER of the cache seemed to allow it. I say its fine at that point for that owner, that puzzle solver, that cacher and that overall experience.

 

Why would anyone other than those three even care?

Link to comment

If you want to solve a puzzle, but not physically get out and find the cache. That OK with me, but don't claim it as a 'find'. Post a note that you solved the puzzle. If it,s a new cache and no one has logged a find, you can log a NOTE as FTS First to Solve.

The OWNER of the cache seemed to allow it. I say its fine at that point for that owner, that puzzle solver, that cacher and that overall experience.

 

Why would anyone other than those three even care?

 

So something needs to affect me directly for me to have an opinion about it?

Link to comment

If you want to solve a puzzle, but not physically get out and find the cache. That OK with me, but don't claim it as a 'find'. Post a note that you solved the puzzle. If it,s a new cache and no one has logged a find, you can log a NOTE as FTS First to Solve.

The OWNER of the cache seemed to allow it. I say its fine at that point for that owner, that puzzle solver, that cacher and that overall experience.

 

Why would anyone other than those three even care?

 

So something needs to affect me directly for me to have an opinion about it?

 

Part of me wants to say yes.

 

But your comment is not an answer to my question, is it?

 

My point is that the situation was between 3 people. Why get all worked up over it?

Link to comment

If you want to solve a puzzle, but not physically get out and find the cache. That OK with me, but don't claim it as a 'find'. Post a note that you solved the puzzle. If it,s a new cache and no one has logged a find, you can log a NOTE as FTS First to Solve.

The OWNER of the cache seemed to allow it. I say its fine at that point for that owner, that puzzle solver, that cacher and that overall experience.

 

Why would anyone other than those three even care?

 

So something needs to affect me directly for me to have an opinion about it?

 

Part of me wants to say yes.

 

But your comment is not an answer to my question, is it?

 

My point is that the situation was between 3 people. Why get all worked up over it?

 

Why is discussing a subject automatically "getting all worked up over it"? It's a geocaching forum. We discuss geocaching related issues here. Because you have an opinion one way or the other regarding a subject it doesn't mean you are "all worked up over it".

 

It is funny however that when discussions such as this arise the people who often seem to be the most "worked up" are the ones who insist that nobody else should give a darn.

Link to comment

If you want to solve a puzzle, but not physically get out and find the cache. That OK with me, but don't claim it as a 'find'. Post a note that you solved the puzzle. If it,s a new cache and no one has logged a find, you can log a NOTE as FTS First to Solve.

The OWNER of the cache seemed to allow it. I say its fine at that point for that owner, that puzzle solver, that cacher and that overall experience.

 

Why would anyone other than those three even care?

 

So something needs to affect me directly for me to have an opinion about it?

 

Part of me wants to say yes.

 

But your comment is not an answer to my question, is it?

 

My point is that the situation was between 3 people. Why get all worked up over it?

 

Why is discussing a subject automatically "getting all worked up over it"? It's a geocaching forum. We discuss geocaching related issues here. Because you have an opinion one way or the other regarding a subject it doesn't mean you are "all worked up over it".

 

It is funny however that when discussions such as this arise the people who often seem to be the most "worked up" are the ones who insist that nobody else should give a darn.

 

I don't think I implied that "you" were getting all worked up unless you are using two accounts for forum posting (some forums expect this with moderators). I do maintain that some people do get worked up over this stuff. For me, I think its much ado about nothing.

Link to comment

Since the cache owner is perfectly happy letting that find stand, I can't imagine why I should be concerned.

Kinda figured you would chime in with that dribble

It's actually "drivel."

 

Oh, that made me happy. Two insults for the price of one! :D

 

Anyway, I completely agree with 9Key here. If I were to log every puzzle I solved just for the fun of it, but never actually found, I would have something like 1,000 more finds. As it is, I store them away in a bookmark list in case I ever get to the area.

 

I'd check with the cache owner to see if he or she knows it was an armchair log.

Link to comment

I especially like the part about "smart people". 9Key, did you paraphrase or did he actually say that?

 

Seems pretty straightforward to me. Didn't sign the log, no logging as "found". There's a note log if the solver really feels the need to brag about it.

 

Edit : I re-read the OP. Says that the cache owner replied to say it's a "remote log" so I guess it means he knows about it and approved it? *shrug*

Edited by Chrysalides
Link to comment

I've had a very tough puzzle on my watchlist for a few years and recently is was logged as a find. The finder remarked that the online logger before him did not sign the paper log. The cache owner then responsed with a log stating that it was a "remote find". I posted asking for a definition of "remote find". Here is his overly wordy response:

 

Sometimes, smart people become really interested in a puzzle, especially if it is a challenging puzzle. And that is not limited to people who just live in the immediate area of the puzzle. People seek out the mental challenges, and they look all over for them, outside their neighborhood to other neighborhoods. And cities. And states.

For example, CowSpots from Arizona does it. As does sleuthers from Colorado. ...just a couple of examples.

 

Now me, myself, when I hide a puzzle, when the puzzle is not integrated with the hide itself but is just a puzzle on the cache page, I make the physical hide a no-brainer. A light pole in a parking lot! A guardrail at the end of the road! An insta-find! A guarantee-find!

 

Except there are exceptions to that... There are sometimes when you want to pair up puzzle difficulty and hide difficulty. But for 50% or so of those puzzles out there, at least mine, the fun and challenge is in solving the puzzle, and the physical find is a formality. That really applies especially with the difficult puzzles. Who wants to spend hours solving a tough puzzle, only to visit the location and dnf? So that is another reason why they are formalities. You get my drift...

 

So anyway, considering all that and getting to "remote logging". It is a practice that quite a few geocachers have practiced. I have already given you examples. It works like this... ...a geocacher from far away solves a puzzle, establishes the correct coordinates, confirms the coordinates with the owner, but since that geocacher is stuck hundreds of miles away and can't drive up to the light pole skirt in the parking lot, the owner, knowing that the physical hide is a light skirt in the back corner of Wal-Mart, says "he did it - he can log the cache."

 

Yes, I know, there will be those of you that say "who cares what others do" and "to each his own", but I think this is a lame practice at the very least. Its a very slippery slope to me. If you're willing to "remote log" (not sign the log book) on puzzles what's next? Logging find on a traditional 5/5 cache because you drove by the area?

 

It is quite apparent in the CO's response that his puzzle hides are intended for intellectually superior individuals. I seriously doubt anyone here on this forum is capable of comprehending his motives for playing the game his way. :D

Link to comment

I especially like the part about "smart people". 9Key, did you paraphrase or did he actually say that?

 

Seems pretty straightforward to me. Didn't sign the log, no logging as "found". There's a note log if the solver really feels the need to brag about it.

 

Edit : I re-read the OP. Says that the cache owner replied to say it's a "remote log" so I guess it means he knows about it and approved it? *shrug*

 

Thanks, I never noticed that. That crazed quote in the OP appears to be from the cache owner himself? And the "smart people" reference is awesome too, I missed that. Now I'm thinking this CO is friends with the remote finder? He drops a couple of other names during the course of his near incoherent babbling as well. There may be a small "remote caching network" here.

 

By the way, I am allowed to have an opinion on this. This is lame. Thank you. :D

Edited by TheWhiteUrkel
Link to comment
Why would anyone other than those three even care?

 

If you've been around geocaching for a while, you've seen assorted logging practices get out of hand and require guidelines changes, and mass archival (and even locking) of caches. It's unpleasant. People are not having a good time, some geocide.

 

Stopping it before it gets that far is good for the game. That's why people discuss logging practices here. Not to "get worked up" but to forestall the decline to a point of needing to expand the guidelines. Again.

 

Social pressures work. These forums are the mechanism to create those social pressures.

Link to comment

Social pressures work. These forums are the mechanism to create those social pressures.

Social pressure in the sense that it represents the will and desire of a large population is a good thing.

 

When that pressure comes from a small percentage of our overall player society, as in this forum, which often does not reflect the desires and beliefs of the greater community who dare not enter here, and which is guided by a few outsized voices, that's pressure, but it isn't social pressure.

 

At the monthly Alabama Geocachers Association dinner that I hosted last night two of the most prolific four puzzle-hiders in central Alabama stated that they wanted their caches to be found, and that if we wanted to team with people from outside the area where one solved it, one found it and signed for both they have no problem with that.

 

Sometimes issues of great angst in this forum aren't issues at all.

 

While our voices here are certainly worth listening to I would hope that Groundspeak bases its decisions, rules and practices on the 'real world' that's out there playing the game instead of pontificating in a forum.

 

If any of you were to ask at events and geocacher gatherings, without stating your opinion first, if this team approach is acceptable I strongly suspect that most would say that it is and very few would care enough to object.

 

To make it clear I reiterate my stance that solving the puzzle and logging it from afar where no one involved actually finds and signs the cache is just as unacceptable as any other form of armchair caching.

Link to comment

Social pressures work. These forums are the mechanism to create those social pressures.

Social pressure in the sense that it represents the will and desire of a large population is a good thing.

 

When that pressure comes from a small percentage of our overall player society, as in this forum, which often does not reflect the desires and beliefs of the greater community who dare not enter here, and which is guided by a few outsized voices, that's pressure, but it isn't social pressure.

 

At the monthly Alabama Geocachers Association dinner that I hosted last night two of the most prolific four puzzle-hiders in central Alabama stated that they wanted their caches to be found, and that if we wanted to team with people from outside the area where one solved it, one found it and signed for both they have no problem with that.

 

Sometimes issues of great angst in this forum aren't issues at all.

 

While our voices here are certainly worth listening to I would hope that Groundspeak bases its decisions, rules and practices on the 'real world' that's out there playing the game instead of pontificating in a forum.

 

If any of you were to ask at events and geocacher gatherings, without stating your opinion first, if this team approach is acceptable I strongly suspect that most would say that it is and very few would care enough to object.

 

To make it clear I reiterate my stance that solving the puzzle and logging it from afar where no one involved actually finds and signs the cache is just as unacceptable as any other form of armchair caching.

 

You are placing the same importance on your small group as others are placing on the forums. How is that any different? It certainly is no better an indication of the larger world that the forums and lacks the diversity.

Link to comment

You are placing the same importance on your small group as others are placing on the forums. How is that any different? It certainly is no better an indication of the larger world that the forums and lacks the diversity.

That would be true if you ignore my second-to-last sentence wherein I invite you to solicit opinions from large numbers of geocachers outside this forum. :D

 

I certainly did not mean that the opinions of the 20-something cachers at my event represent geocachers overall.

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment
Just for kicks & giggles, here's a link to the thread announcing the crackdown on couch potato logging.
There's a couple of pearls in that thread. Frist, it makes it clear that TPTB will only step in if the cache is 'abused with many bogus couch potato logs'. Also, it makes it clear that this decision was not a step toward doing away with the remaining virts. Finally, it's amusing that some of those who were against TPTB in that thread are also against the cache owner being able to define what is a find in this thread.
Since the cache owner is perfectly happy letting that find stand, I can't imagine why I should be concerned.
Kinda figured you would chime in with that dribble
It's actually "drivel."

 

Oh, that made me happy. Two insults for the price of one! :D

 

Anyway, I completely agree with 9Key here. If I were to log every puzzle I solved just for the fun of it, but never actually found, I would have something like 1,000 more finds. As it is, I store them away in a bookmark list in case I ever get to the area.

You would only have 1000 more finds if your 'found' 1000 cache owners that agreed with you.
I'd check with the cache owner to see if he or she knows it was an armchair log.
You may wish to reread the OP. The cache owner is aware that the individual never visited the cache site and doesn't care.
Why would anyone other than those three even care?
If you've been around geocaching for a while, you've seen assorted logging practices get out of hand and require guidelines changes, and mass archival (and even locking) of caches. It's unpleasant. People are not having a good time, some geocide.

 

Stopping it before it gets that far is good for the game. That's why people discuss logging practices here. Not to "get worked up" but to forestall the decline to a point of needing to expand the guidelines. Again.

 

Social pressures work. These forums are the mechanism to create those social pressures.

If you've been around the geocaching forums for a while, you've seen the puritans get worked into a frenzy pretty much anytime someone doesn't play the game exactly how they wish to. In this situation, a cache logger and a cache owner agree that a 'found' log is appropriate. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

Social pressures work. These forums are the mechanism to create those social pressures.

Social pressure in the sense that it represents the will and desire of a large population is a good thing.

 

When that pressure comes from a small percentage of our overall player society, as in this forum, which often does not reflect the desires and beliefs of the greater community who dare not enter here, and which is guided by a few outsized voices, that's pressure, but it isn't social pressure.

 

At the monthly Alabama Geocachers Association dinner that I hosted last night two of the most prolific four puzzle-hiders in central Alabama stated that they wanted their caches to be found, and that if we wanted to team with people from outside the area where one solved it, one found it and signed for both they have no problem with that.

 

Sometimes issues of great angst in this forum aren't issues at all.

 

While our voices here are certainly worth listening to I would hope that Groundspeak bases its decisions, rules and practices on the 'real world' that's out there playing the game instead of pontificating in a forum.

 

If any of you were to ask at events and geocacher gatherings, without stating your opinion first, if this team approach is acceptable I strongly suspect that most would say that it is and very few would care enough to object.

 

To make it clear I reiterate my stance that solving the puzzle and logging it from afar where no one involved actually finds and signs the cache is just as unacceptable as any other form of armchair caching.

 

You are placing the same importance on your small group as others are placing on the forums. How is that any different? It certainly is no better an indication of the larger world that the forums and lacks the diversity.

It's different because forums, in general, tend to become a congregating point for like minded individuals and blowhards. People post things on forums that they would never say in a 'live' setting because they tend to not actually consider that those that are affected by what they say are their peers. In a real-life setting, however, they see how their statements impact the enjoyment of others so they are more likely to take those people into account. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

I've had a very tough puzzle on my watchlist for a few years and recently is was logged as a find. The finder remarked that the online logger before him did not sign the paper log. The cache owner then responsed with a log stating that it was a "remote find". I posted asking for a definition of "remote find". Here is his overly wordy response:

 

Sometimes, smart people become really interested in a puzzle, especially if it is a challenging puzzle. And that is not limited to people who just live in the immediate area of the puzzle. People seek out the mental challenges, and they look all over for them, outside their neighborhood to other neighborhoods. And cities. And states.

For example, CowSpots from Arizona does it. As does sleuthers from Colorado. ...just a couple of examples.

 

Now me, myself, when I hide a puzzle, when the puzzle is not integrated with the hide itself but is just a puzzle on the cache page, I make the physical hide a no-brainer. A light pole in a parking lot! A guardrail at the end of the road! An insta-find! A guarantee-find!

 

Except there are exceptions to that... There are sometimes when you want to pair up puzzle difficulty and hide difficulty. But for 50% or so of those puzzles out there, at least mine, the fun and challenge is in solving the puzzle, and the physical find is a formality. That really applies especially with the difficult puzzles. Who wants to spend hours solving a tough puzzle, only to visit the location and dnf? So that is another reason why they are formalities. You get my drift...

 

So anyway, considering all that and getting to "remote logging". It is a practice that quite a few geocachers have practiced. I have already given you examples. It works like this... ...a geocacher from far away solves a puzzle, establishes the correct coordinates, confirms the coordinates with the owner, but since that geocacher is stuck hundreds of miles away and can't drive up to the light pole skirt in the parking lot, the owner, knowing that the physical hide is a light skirt in the back corner of Wal-Mart, says "he did it - he can log the cache."

 

Yes, I know, there will be those of you that say "who cares what others do" and "to each his own", but I think this is a lame practice at the very least. Its a very slippery slope to me. If you're willing to "remote log" (not sign the log book) on puzzles what's next? Logging find on a traditional 5/5 cache because you drove by the area?

 

Excellent.

Could the OP please PM me the cache owners id so I can log finds on any traditional caches he's got out there.

After all, I could go to the cache page and get the co-ordinates - but I'm stuck thousands of miles away......

 

:D:laughing::)

Link to comment

I've had a very tough puzzle on my watchlist for a few years and recently is was logged as a find. The finder remarked that the online logger before him did not sign the paper log. The cache owner then responsed with a log stating that it was a "remote find". I posted asking for a definition of "remote find". Here is his overly wordy response:

 

Sometimes, smart people become really interested in a puzzle, especially if it is a challenging puzzle. And that is not limited to people who just live in the immediate area of the puzzle. People seek out the mental challenges, and they look all over for them, outside their neighborhood to other neighborhoods. And cities. And states.

For example, CowSpots from Arizona does it. As does sleuthers from Colorado. ...just a couple of examples.

 

Now me, myself, when I hide a puzzle, when the puzzle is not integrated with the hide itself but is just a puzzle on the cache page, I make the physical hide a no-brainer. A light pole in a parking lot! A guardrail at the end of the road! An insta-find! A guarantee-find!

 

Except there are exceptions to that... There are sometimes when you want to pair up puzzle difficulty and hide difficulty. But for 50% or so of those puzzles out there, at least mine, the fun and challenge is in solving the puzzle, and the physical find is a formality. That really applies especially with the difficult puzzles. Who wants to spend hours solving a tough puzzle, only to visit the location and dnf? So that is another reason why they are formalities. You get my drift...

 

So anyway, considering all that and getting to "remote logging". It is a practice that quite a few geocachers have practiced. I have already given you examples. It works like this... ...a geocacher from far away solves a puzzle, establishes the correct coordinates, confirms the coordinates with the owner, but since that geocacher is stuck hundreds of miles away and can't drive up to the light pole skirt in the parking lot, the owner, knowing that the physical hide is a light skirt in the back corner of Wal-Mart, says "he did it - he can log the cache."

 

Yes, I know, there will be those of you that say "who cares what others do" and "to each his own", but I think this is a lame practice at the very least. Its a very slippery slope to me. If you're willing to "remote log" (not sign the log book) on puzzles what's next? Logging find on a traditional 5/5 cache because you drove by the area?

 

Excellent.

Could the OP please PM me the cache owners id so I can log finds on any traditional caches he's got out there.

After all, I could go to the cache page and get the co-ordinates - but I'm stuck thousands of miles away......

 

:D:laughing::)

I don't think that Will is arguing that the specific puzzle cache owner is allowing anyone to freely armchair log all of his caches. He is arguing that one person allowing someone to armchair one of his caches for a very limited reason will open the door to armchair logging to become more and more accepted until it is a commom occurance. Of course, this theory ignores TPTB's stated position that they will take action against any caches that are routinely used in this manner.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
It's different because forums, in general, tend to become a congregating point for like minded individuals and blowhards. People post things on forums that they would never say in a 'live' setting because they tend to not actually consider that those that are affected by what they say are their peers. In a real-life setting, however, they see how their statements impact the enjoyment of others so they are more likely to take those people into account.

 

If these forums were a congregating point for like minded individuals then there would rarely be the enthusiastic and ocassionaly acrimonious debates that we see here.

 

In live settings people are obviously less likely to criticize someone directly, but I've been part of, or witnessed discussions about logging practices, micro spew, poorly chosen cache locations - many of the same discussions we have here. In the realy world I've actually encountered far more homogeneity of thought regarding many of these issues than I find here.

Link to comment

I love solving puzzle caches and have solved quite a few from all over the country. I would never dare to think about logging them as a find though! the guidelines are pretty clear: sign the logbook, then log your find online. There are two stages of every mystery cache. First, figure out the answer, THEN go get the cache. Just because I did the first part doesn't entitle me to claim I did the second part.

Link to comment

Social pressures work. These forums are the mechanism to create those social pressures.

Social pressure in the sense that it represents the will and desire of a large population is a good thing.

 

When that pressure comes from a small percentage of our overall player society, as in this forum, which often does not reflect the desires and beliefs of the greater community who dare not enter here, and which is guided by a few outsized voices, that's pressure, but it isn't social pressure.

 

At the monthly Alabama Geocachers Association dinner that I hosted last night two of the most prolific four puzzle-hiders in central Alabama stated that they wanted their caches to be found, and that if we wanted to team with people from outside the area where one solved it, one found it and signed for both they have no problem with that.

 

Sometimes issues of great angst in this forum aren't issues at all.

 

While our voices here are certainly worth listening to I would hope that Groundspeak bases its decisions, rules and practices on the 'real world' that's out there playing the game instead of pontificating in a forum.

 

If any of you were to ask at events and geocacher gatherings, without stating your opinion first, if this team approach is acceptable I strongly suspect that most would say that it is and very few would care enough to object.

 

To make it clear I reiterate my stance that solving the puzzle and logging it from afar where no one involved actually finds and signs the cache is just as unacceptable as any other form of armchair caching.

 

OMG, a voice of reason. What are you doing here?

 

:D

Link to comment
It's different because forums, in general, tend to become a congregating point for like minded individuals and blowhards. People post things on forums that they would never say in a 'live' setting because they tend to not actually consider that those that are affected by what they say are their peers. In a real-life setting, however, they see how their statements impact the enjoyment of others so they are more likely to take those people into account.

 

If these forums were a congregating point for like minded individuals then there would rarely be the enthusiastic and ocassionaly acrimonious debates that we see here.

You are twisting my point. I am not for a moment suggesting that everyone in the forum agrees. I am merely saying that like minded people congregate in here. There is a clear difference that I assume that you can see.
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...
×
×
  • Create New...