Armchair caching

[+Team Cotati]

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.

 

Speaking for myself, I can assure you that I have never posted anything in here that I would not say in a face to face setting.

 

Actually, by my standards, I have been quite self-constrained.

[+sbell111]

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.

 

Speaking for myself, I can assure you that I have never posted anything in here that I would not say in a face to face setting.

 

Actually, by my standards, I have been quite self-constrained.

I have little doubt that this is correct.

 

The first sentence of my post still works.

[+fizzymagic]

Why would anyone other than those three even care?

And you're posting in this thread because... ???

[knowschad]

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.

I think that Briansnat must have missed the "and blowhards" part.

[+Car54]

Not being one of the "smart people", I must admit that I used to hound my poor husband to "help" me solve some of the more difficult/obscure puzzles. But we cache as a team and don't log our finds individually anyway, so we're good there. I will say this thread helped me understand something I didn't get before - I could never understand why a terrific puzzle that took quite an effort to solve would lead us to an LP for the final. While I'm not all about the swag or anything, we are part of the "LPC avoidance crowd" and I often felt "tricked" into going after a cache I don't like. (If you like LPC's, that's fine. I'm OK - you're OK - etc....)

 

Mrs. Car54

[+Harry Dolphin]

I will say this thread helped me understand something I didn't get before - I could never understand why a terrific puzzle that took quite an effort to solve would lead us to an LP for the final. While I'm not all about the swag or anything, we are part of the "LPC avoidance crowd" and I often felt "tricked" into going after a cache I don't like. (If you like LPC's, that's fine. I'm OK - you're OK - etc....)

 

Mrs. Car54

 

Mrs. Car54, where are you? (Sorry. I couldn't help myself...)

Some of the best mystery caches that I've found are in an urban setting. There are some truly evil minds in New York City! And, they ARE good! Unfortunately, the city is a very difficult place to hide anything other than a very small or micro container. (Though I did find a five-gallon bucket there once...) That being said, none of the three hundred, or so, caches that I've found In New York City have been lamp post caches. LPC is a strictly surburban phenomenon.

[+vegaschick]

Not being one of the "smart people", I must admit that I used to hound my poor husband to "help" me solve some of the more difficult/obscure puzzles. But we cache as a team and don't log our finds individually anyway, so we're good there. I will say this thread helped me understand something I didn't get before - I could never understand why a terrific puzzle that took quite an effort to solve would lead us to an LP for the final. While I'm not all about the swag or anything, we are part of the "LPC avoidance crowd" and I often felt "tricked" into going after a cache I don't like. (If you like LPC's, that's fine. I'm OK - you're OK - etc....)

 

Mrs. Car54

 

When it comes to puzzle caches, I'm strictly solving it for the puzzle and not size or location.

[+Minimike2]

I wish the OP would tell us the cache ID. We could then all post NM logs and then NA logs if those are deleted.

[+Car54]

Mrs. Car54, where are you? (Sorry. I couldn't help myself...)

 

That's great! At least you understand the reference behind the name. I'm always confused when someone thinks it's a NASCAR reference and asks us who drives # 54.

[+sbell111]

I wish the OP would tell us the cache ID. We could then all post NM logs and then NA logs if those are deleted.

Logging a NM or SBA on a cache that you have not attempted is far from appropriate.

[+Jeep_Dog]

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?

 

I find armchair caches of any type in poor form. If I had a puzzle cache like the one described, I doubt I would let non-find caches stand as a "found it" log. Now, if there was a "solved this puzzle!" log, then I'd be quite content with the geniusly face stat given to a fellow cacher.

 

As has been pointed out by others in this and doubtless thousands of other discussions, claiming finds on a cache that one has not physically found does cause angst, disgruntlement, woe, concern, and in the worse cases inconvenience to other cachers.

 

In my opinion, it cheapens the activity. That being said, I think my opinion along the lines of "so and so did this or that" is worth my time and finger pointing (well, I'm not perfect, as I realize that I can think of one case where a slippery slope type of situation got my attention and quite forcefully state my opinion).

 

Yes, 9Key, I agree with you that this case is a slippery slope. Why does it bother you? Is it because that it seems to you that a find is not just a smiley? Sometimes, to some of us, there are certain caches we are quite proud to have on our list, and obviously went through great pains to log certain caches?

 

If so, then I wonder why the personal email a few years back in a similar cache case where a similar opinion as the one you stated here as that you deemed as "unreasonable and emotional?"

Edited October 20, 2009 by Jeep_Dog

[+Shelle518]

Armchair puzzle caching seems to be taking hold around here. The CO's don't have problems with it. They like to see their caches found. Helping solve the puzzle is one thing but not going to GZ and claiming a find is another. For us it just seems wrong and we won't be claiming a cache that we didn't sign the log.

[JustWannaCache]

I'm looking for someone to "team up" with on some puzzles in my area. If you are interested, send me a message and we can get started on a few.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Mrs. Car54, where are you? (Sorry. I couldn't help myself...)

 

That's great! At least you understand the reference behind the name. I'm always confused when someone thinks it's a NASCAR reference and asks us who drives # 54.

 

Tell them Gunther Toody drove Car 54, with co-driver Muldoon!