Jump to content

Purposely Posting Bad Coordinates


Recommended Posts

I've heard about a cacher that has developed a reputation for purposely posting bad coords for their caches. Not every one of their hides has bad coords, but they're often off by 40 - 100 feet. While some people would blame tree cover, mountains, etc, this CO claims that it's to make their hides more challenging. The same cacher also has been accused of deleting logs that are critical of the bad coords.

 

It's my opinion that if it's truly a good hide, you shouldn't need bogus coords to make it challenging. What's the best way to address an issue such as this? Some would say just to ignore their hides, but I think that having bogus coords makes the hobby look bad. I would hope reporting could be done anonymously so the "bad coord cacher" wouldn't go out and do anything malicious to the reporter's hides, etc.

 

What do you think?

Link to comment

A newer cacher did that on a couple of hides here in my area. He even said on the cache page that the cache was within 150' of the posted coords. After about 10 veteran cachers DNfd it and posting things like "This should be a puzzle" the local reviewer disabled it and asked the CO to contact him.

Link to comment

The subject comes up here periodically. I think this post by one of the moderators sums it up quite well:

 

Cache coordinates should be posted as close as possible for ALL Traditional Caches. Intentionally posting "soft" coordinates in an incorrect procedure.

 

Yup, bad form. I've seen people do it on several occasions over the years to make their hides "more challenging", and they usually state so right on the cache page. I have no idea what influences them to try this, but I figure they all just come up with it themselves, and generally aren't people who hang around in this or any local geocaching forums, or interact personally with other members of the local Geocaching community. Places where they would find out this is "bad form". :)

Link to comment

I've done it for exactly the reasons the OP's person in question does. That was one cache intended to be hard and I was about 15' "off".

 

Generally though I don't. The muse moved on to other things.

 

For the OP.

In your shoes where it's chronic (and they don't own an early magellan where I swear it's a problem even when it's not intended) I'd post a find on cache finds that are clearly as far "off" as the coords.

 

"Found a nice ammo can right at ground zero, Score! Thanks for the cache!"

Link to comment

I've heard about a cacher that has developed a reputation for purposely posting bad coords for their caches. Not every one of their hides has bad coords, but they're often off by 40 - 100 feet. While some people would blame tree cover, mountains, etc, this CO claims that it's to make their hides more challenging. The same cacher also has been accused of deleting logs that are critical of the bad coords.

 

It's my opinion that if it's truly a good hide, you shouldn't need bogus coords to make it challenging. What's the best way to address an issue such as this? Some would say just to ignore their hides, but I think that having bogus coords makes the hobby look bad. I would hope reporting could be done anonymously so the "bad coord cacher" wouldn't go out and do anything malicious to the reporter's hides, etc.

 

What do you think?

 

You could try explaining the concept of accurate (at least as good as possible) to the cache owner.

Listing inaccurate numbers is NOT the way to create a challenging hide.

 

There is an owner not too far from me who has also deliberately and admittedly posted 'soft' numbers because they started Geocaching without a GPSr, and thought actually having good numbers lessened the fun-factor once they got a GPSr.

 

It's Geocaching, not Geoguessing. Accurate co-ordinates are the basis of the game.

 

P.S. I really like the new avatar!

Link to comment

Actually... this was the log from the other thread that I was really looking for:

 

 

 

Intentionally posting incorrect or "soft" coordinates is still wrong for a Traditional Cache type.

 

If you have listed a cache on Geocaching.com, then you have checked the box indicating that you have read the Cache Listing Requirements / Guidelines.

 

Here's the pertinent section.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#traditional

Traditional Caches

 

This is the original cache type consisting of (at a bare minimum) a container and a logbook. The cache may be filled with objects for trade. Normally you'll find a Tupperware-style container, ammo box, or bucket filled with goodies, or smaller container too small to contain items except for a logbook. The coordinates listed on the traditional cache page are the exact location of the cache. A container with no logbook and just an object or codeword for verification generally does not qualify as a traditional cache.

 

Caches listed with intentionally incorrect coordinates are not in compliance with this part of the guidelines.

 

Link to comment

Bad coords don't make a cache hard to find. They just make you look in the wrong spot.

 

If the owner wants a challenging hide, he should do something creative.

 

The best way to address it? If you find one of his caches and it's a traditional, you could just post updated coords and say your GPS had you at (your coords). If it's a multi, just add or subtract the appropriate coords, like my coords were + .008 north and - .012 west off

Edited by Skippermark
Link to comment
Bad coords don't make a cache hard to find. They just make you look in the wrong spot.

If the owner wants a challenging hide, he should do something creative.

 

Dang! So, my idea of creating a cache where the coords put you into North Korea, when it is actually hidden in Mankato, Minnesota might not be as clever as I thought? Back to the drawing board!

Link to comment
I've heard about a cacher that has developed a reputation for purposely posting bad coords for their caches. Not every one of their hides has bad coords, but they're often off by 40 - 100 feet. While some people would blame tree cover, mountains, etc, this CO claims that it's to make their hides more challenging. The same cacher also has been accused of deleting logs that are critical of the bad coords.

 

It's my opinion that if it's truly a good hide, you shouldn't need bogus coords to make it challenging. What's the best way to address an issue such as this? Some would say just to ignore their hides, but I think that having bogus coords makes the hobby look bad. I would hope reporting could be done anonymously so the "bad coord cacher" wouldn't go out and do anything malicious to the reporter's hides, etc.

 

What do you think?

Yet another reason why this would come in handy! :)
Link to comment

Would it be wrong to assume that the cache has migrated to where it is found and, in good sportsmanship, we should return the cache to the proper coordinates, even if it's in the wide open muggle prone world?

 

Deliberately posting soft coords is, in my opinion, the best way to tempt someone who lives on the fine line between right and wrong.

Link to comment
Bad coords don't make a cache hard to find. They just make you look in the wrong spot.

If the owner wants a challenging hide, he should do something creative.

 

Dang! So, my idea of creating a cache where the coords put you into North Korea, when it is actually hidden in Mankato, Minnesota might not be as clever as I thought? Back to the drawing board!

Well, it could prove interesting. :rolleyes:

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...