PC to log temporary caches?

[+JeepPrincess]

I just attended my first event cache over the weekend. They hid 24 temporary caches for the event game. I wonder if it is appropriate to log the temporary caches. Other cachers have said you just post "attended" over and over for the number of temporary caches you've found. Is this PC?

[+t4e]

and what would be the point of logging 24 attends? ...that's just like logging multiple finds on the same cache, you will just end up with 24 finds on 1 unique cache

 

besides those are what the name implies "temporary" just to have some fun at the event

Edited March 30, 2010 by t4e

[+KoosKoos]

In some areas, it's a common practice to log multiple "attended" logs to get "credit" for finding temporary caches at the event.

 

Other people find the practice (pick your level): silly, weird, cheating, abuse of geocaching.com resources, pure evil.

 

Ultimately, it's between you and the event organizer.

 

For me, I don't see the point in getting a smiley for something that isn't a listed geocache on this site, but I also don't care what someone else chooses to do.

[+Chrysalides]

Ultimately, it's between you and the event organizer.

That.

 

If you're looking for opinion, I wouldn't recommend doing it. You can write in your attended log how many temporary caches you found.

 

If you're looking for advice, if you decide to do it, don't look for approval here, just do it. I suspect most replies here would be either "do what you will" or "it is <insert derogatory verb here>".

 

Whatever you decide, have fun!

Edited March 30, 2010 by Chrysalides

[+SSO JOAT]

Pure evil AND the dumbest thing I ever heard. What next? Relogging each multi-cache over and over again based on the number of stages in it?

 

Any day caches are part of the event as a whole. It is a single "attended" log to cover everything you did there.

Edited March 30, 2010 by SSO JOAT

[+Worstseeker]

It sounds like we attended the same event over the weekend, The Highlands Spring Fling, which was amazing. Take a look at the page for the event, it is taken over by people that are logging each temporary cache. To me this is very strange, because if anyone checks out the cache page, all you see is "so and so is logging temporary cache 1 through whatever." In my opinion, the page should now be for thanking the hosts for all of their hard work on the event, and letting them know how much fun you had, or even suggestions or critisims. Now to look at any "real" feedback on the event, one has to filter through literally hundreds, or perhaps thousands of nonsense logs.

 

Of course I am very new to this, and I'm sure that I've offended the people that feel the need to log every temporary cache, and I do apologize to them. I just don't see the point, I cache because I enjoy spending time with my son and meeting others with similiar interests. I could really care less about the numbers involved.

[+fizzymagic]

Other people find the practice (pick your level): silly, weird, cheating, abuse of geocaching.com resources, pure evil.

You left off "pathetic."

[+briansnat]

My opinion is that temporary caches are not listed on this website so they shouldn't be logged here. Log the event and in your log you can mention all the temp caches you found.

 

In a few areas it's a common practice. In most areas it's considered to be numbers pumping if you do it and might mark you for ridicule.

 

Is it "PC"? Generally speaking, no. However it is "PC" in some regions. In the end it is between your conscience and the the event sponsor . If you feel a need to jack up your find count and the event organizer is OK with it then go for it.

Edited March 30, 2010 by briansnat

[+WRASTRO]

So you visited 24 different areas of a single event. Sounds like it was probably a lot of fun to experience at a single event that you attended one time. I would log a single attended log and tell the story of the fun time I had. As others have said, temporary caches are not caches as defined by Groundspeak so I can't think of any reason to try to add finding temporary caches to a find count by posting multiple attended logs. This is even stranger than logging multiple finds on physical caches.

[+JeepPrincess]

Thanks to all for your input. I personally felt it was suspicious and strange to see multiple "attended" entries on the event page. I was there for the experience, not the numbers. I'm going to stay with what my original thoughts were and just say I attended the event - one entry, end of story.

Peace

[Mr.Yuck]

Thanks to all for your input. I personally felt it was suspicious and strange to see multiple "attended" entries on the event page. I was there for the experience, not the numbers. I'm going to stay with what my original thoughts were and just say I attended the event - one entry, end of story.

Peace

 

It's a highly controversial practice that is dying a slow death due to peer pressure. The only places in the entire world where it still takes place on that kind of scale is Western Pa., West Virgina, Ohio, and Wisconsin. (Don't ask me why the "gap" between Ohio and Wisconsin). If you ever go to a large outdoor event in Ohio, expect to see over 100 attended logs per person.

 

Just do what you think is right. Which I see you already have.

[+morts01]

It's a highly controversial practice that is dying a slow death due to peer pressure. The only places in the entire world where it still takes place on that kind of scale is Western Pa., West Virgina, Ohio, and Wisconsin. (Don't ask me why the "gap" between Ohio and Wisconsin). If you ever go to a large outdoor event in Ohio, expect to see over 100 attended logs per person.

 

Just do what you think is right. Which I see you already have.

 

My part of the woods are in the #'s game as well (Iowa) - They set up a perm. cache called "logger" or whatever and you use that one to log the perm. find as well as log over and over again all the temp finds to bring your #'s up! Just look up the recent events in Iowa and you will see notes about how to log the temp finds which I thought was weird

 

While they are there looking for all the temp finds that someone 20 feet in front of them just found, hubby and I are deep in the woods miles away geocaching for real! JMO - If you pay too much attention to the #'s then you aren't caching for the right reason - family time and exercise and the great outdoors!

[+StarBrand]

In my book 1 gc number equals 1 and only 1 find/attend log.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Moving to the Geocaching Topics forum.

[+thedeadpirate]

Thanks to all for your input. I personally felt it was suspicious and strange to see multiple "attended" entries on the event page. I was there for the experience, not the numbers. I'm going to stay with what my original thoughts were and just say I attended the event - one entry, end of story.

Peace

Good choice.

 

Welcome to the forums and geocaching.

 

Now go and never look back at this thread.

 

 

*** First line was conveying my opinion of the OP's choice of actions. Second line was a friendly welcome to geocaching. The last line was advice on how to remain with geocaching.

[+Walts Hunting]

Fortunately here in the Sacramento area when we have an event people put out permanent caches that are listed with the froggie. I have never even heard of the above practice.

 

From my viewpoint the only legitimate is on a cache listed on GC.

 

But for some people it is about the numbers. I am in it for the joy.

[Mr.Yuck]

 

My part of the woods are in the #'s game as well (Iowa) - They set up a perm. cache called "logger" or whatever and you use that one to log the perm. find as well as log over and over again all the temp finds to bring your #'s up! Just look up the recent events in Iowa and you will see notes about how to log the temp finds which I thought was weird

 

While they are there looking for all the temp finds that someone 20 feet in front of them just found, hubby and I are deep in the woods miles away geocaching for real! JMO - If you pay too much attention to the #'s then you aren't caching for the right reason - family time and exercise and the great outdoors!

 

That's all we needed is a thread bump, and move to the Geocaching topics forum.

 

OK, I've heard of that which you describe a few times. As the practice of logging temporary caches continues to fade out, and events are held in traditional number cacher pockets where the host does not allow the logging of temps, someone will put out an easy traditional cache and invite people who engage in this practice to log their temp finds from the offending (to them) event cache.

 

So in other words, as this practice continues to die out, the few and the proud will only make themselves look even more ridiculous. Like people in Ohio running around with 30-40 10 year event icons.

[+ADTCacheur]

I personally would never log multiple finds on one cache (On purpose ). Despite that, I can see why people do it. Too many people are just in it for the number, and feel they should get credit because they found the temporary caches at the event/found the geocache once more for a TB drop. To me this shouldn't be the case, but geocaching is the type of game where you play your way, I'll play mine, and they may never coincide. Who cares what anybody else does, so long as it doesn't affect others (logging a false find on a cache that's gone missing, though nobody knows it yet, and logging a TB because somebody took a picture of it with the number showing are just about the only things that would). Really, unless the numbers really matter to you, all you'll gain by doing this would be getting a little closer to the "numbers" group, and moving a lot further away from the "recreational" group. You make your choice of which group you'd rather.

[+humboldt flier]

Not even close to PC heck it isn't even MAC

 

It would seem that the organizers rather than placing a number of temps. could have placed them through the site with publish dates co-incident with the event date.

[+Klatch]

Not even close to PC heck it isn't even MAC

 

It would seem that the organizers rather than placing a number of temps. could have placed them through the site with publish dates co-incident with the event date.

Not if you want to place caches that don't comply with the listing guidelines.

Edited May 23, 2010 by Klatch

[+Kit Fox]

I just attended my first event cache over the weekend. They hid 24 temporary caches for the event game. I wonder if it is appropriate to log the temporary caches. Other cachers have said you just post "attended" over and over for the number of temporary caches you've found. Is this PC?

 

Excellent question!

 

From 2006 The New Numbers Game, I hate to admit it: Jeremy was right

 

The majority of the number padding schemes are directly related to the "non-existant competition." These schemes degrade geocaching, in my opinion.

 

* Fake found it logs for the purpose of increasing your find count. Found it = didn't find it

* Power cachers who spend 3 minutes looking for a cache, then place their own cache when they can't find it, just so they aren't denied a smiley for their "effort."

* Placement of non GC approved caches which are then logged as "attended event" to further increase find counts*Pocket caches

*Geocoin Sheets passed around to increase trackable stats

*Micro spew / Lame Location spew (not to be confused with creative caches hidden in creative locations)

*FTF seekers who ignore posted signs, hours, etc, so they can be FTF and pound their chest.

 

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...amp;pid=2835399 From Briansnat back in 2007

 

Geocaching used to about the thrill of the hunt and discovering new and exciting places.

 

It's devolved into a new game called "Smiley Hunt", where the goal is to accumule smileys.

 

It's changed from "All you need is a GPS and a thirst for adventure" to "All you need is a GPS and the

willingness to endure the mundane".

[Mr.Yuck]

Not even close to PC heck it isn't even MAC

 

It would seem that the organizers rather than placing a number of temps. could have placed them through the site with publish dates co-incident with the event date.

Not if you want to place caches that don't comply with the listing guidelines.

 

Exactly. If people, in say, NE Ohio, are attending events 120 times (and yes, this really happened last year), I have a funny feeling they're not exactly 529 feet apart, and in compliance with the guidelines.

 

By the way, I couldn't care less. However, it is funny to point at these people and laugh.

[4wheelin_fool]

I just attended my first event cache over the weekend. They hid 24 temporary caches for the event game. I wonder if it is appropriate to log the temporary caches. Other cachers have said you just post "attended" over and over for the number of temporary caches you've found. Is this PC?

 

Excellent question!

 

From 2006 The New Numbers Game, I hate to admit it: Jeremy was right

 

The majority of the number padding schemes are directly related to the "non-existant competition." These schemes degrade geocaching, in my opinion.

 

* Fake found it logs for the purpose of increasing your find count. Found it = didn't find it

* Power cachers who spend 3 minutes looking for a cache, then place their own cache when they can't find it, just so they aren't denied a smiley for their "effort."

* Placement of non GC approved caches which are then logged as "attended event" to further increase find counts*Pocket caches

*Geocoin Sheets passed around to increase trackable stats

*Micro spew / Lame Location spew (not to be confused with creative caches hidden in creative locations)

*FTF seekers who ignore posted signs, hours, etc, so they can be FTF and pound their chest.

 

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...amp;pid=2835399 From Briansnat back in 2007

 

Geocaching used to about the thrill of the hunt and discovering new and exciting places.

 

It's devolved into a new game called "Smiley Hunt", where the goal is to accumule smileys.

 

It's changed from "All you need is a GPS and a thirst for adventure" to "All you need is a GPS and the

willingness to endure the mundane".

 

This post reflects my thoughts on the practice, only with a whole lot more jaded apathy sprinkled in.

[+morts01]

Could this be fixed by only allowing one "find" log per GC#?

[4wheelin_fool]

Could this be fixed by only allowing one "find" log per GC#?

 

But it's not really broken. I'd like to see find counts marked "private" first.

 

I suspect some people do it because they don't want everyone to see them as a noob. If you gave them a choice, they might choose privacy over bogus counts.

[+thedeadpirate]

I'd like to see find counts marked "private" first.

I second this.

[+sbell111]

Could this be fixed by only allowing one "find" log per GC#?

There's nothing broken to fix. The issue is completely between the event organizer and the attendee. If the attendee wants to log temporary event caches to the event page AND the event organizer has no issues with the practice, then there is no problem.

[+Vater_Araignee]

If you look at it as a BAMN Numbers whore, then it is OK if the host will allow it.

 

If you look at it as a fair play numbers freak, then it isn't OK even if the host will allow it.

 

If you look at it as a permanence issue then you simply shouldn't do it.

 

Do you think it would be OK for me to log geocaches that are listed at terracaching or any other listing service on my archived cache so they are counted?

I consider it the same thing.

When you got the list of caches for the event, you got them from a different listing service.

[+-cheeto-]

The only places in the entire world where it still takes place on that kind of scale is Western Pa., West Virgina, Ohio, and Wisconsin. (Don't ask me why the "gap" between Ohio and Wisconsin). If you ever go to a large outdoor event in Ohio, expect to see over 100 attended logs per person.

 

The Wisconsin Geocaching Association no longer allows multiple attend logs on WGA events and they are deleted. This has been in place for the last few WGA events.

 

However, it's still commonplace at many non-WGA caching events within Wisconsin that have temp caches.

 

The use of "pocket caches" to log event temp caches is also taking place in Wisconsin. In fact, some actually log their finds against archived "pocket caches".

 

Just like Groundspeak, the WGA looks away and has no real comment on how some folks play the game. It is what it is and the only way it will ever stop is to stop allowing multiple logs on cache listings.

[JohnX]

If you do a little math and follow the .1 mile rule and I doubt you could get them close, 28 caches would take you through a 2.8 mile walk to find them all. A nice way to get exercise but it sounds kind of pointless to me.

[+thedeadpirate]

Do you think it would be OK for me to log geocaches that are listed at terracaching or any other listing service on my archived cache so they are counted?

I consider it the same thing.

When you got the list of caches for the event, you got them from a different listing service.

That's about the best way to describe the practice.

[AZcachemeister]

My opinion is that temporary caches are not listed on this website so they shouldn't be logged here. Log the event and in your log you can mention all the temp caches you found.

 

In a few areas it's a common practice. In most areas it's considered to be numbers pumping if you do it and might mark you for ridicule.

 

Is it "PC"? Generally speaking, no. However it is "PC" in some regions. In the end it is between your conscience and the the event sponsor . If you feel a need to jack up your find count and the event organizer is OK with it then go for it.

 

This is pretty much my take on the subject.

I understand some 'renowned' cachers have taken so much flack from the practice that they deleted ALL their finds and went underground.

YMMV

[Mr.Yuck]

The only places in the entire world where it still takes place on that kind of scale is Western Pa., West Virgina, Ohio, and Wisconsin. (Don't ask me why the "gap" between Ohio and Wisconsin). If you ever go to a large outdoor event in Ohio, expect to see over 100 attended logs per person.

 

The Wisconsin Geocaching Association no longer allows multiple attend logs on WGA events and they are deleted. This has been in place for the last few WGA events.

 

However, it's still commonplace at many non-WGA caching events within Wisconsin that have temp caches.

 

The use of "pocket caches" to log event temp caches is also taking place in Wisconsin. In fact, some actually log their finds against archived "pocket caches".

 

Just like Groundspeak, the WGA looks away and has no real comment on how some folks play the game. It is what it is and the only way it will ever stop is to stop allowing multiple logs on cache listings.

 

Oh, I'd never imply it takes place at every event in Wisconsin. Yes, I knew about WGA dis-allowing it. Part of the reason I say it's dying. Heck, just look at this thread. Three or four years ago there'd be about 1,000 replies by now. Also, the practice is completely dead here in NY; haven't seen it since 2007. With the charge led by a large (but not Mega) annual event that dis-allowed it starting in 2008.

 

Well, I don't know about any of the pocket cache stuff, but post #12 is from someone in Iowa who says there's a traditional cache used for the purposes of logging temp caches at events that don't allow logging extra attends. I know for a fact there's at least one cache like this in Wisconsin, and it's cache description specifically states that it's OK to log temps from WGA events on the cache page. I know this because someone posted a link to it back when this was a hot topic. Of course I'd never post the link, even if I could remember or find it.

[Hazelette]

I had an event on my watchlist that took place yesterday. I wanted to go to it, but I wasn't able to do so in the end. Of course, I forgot to remove it from the list, and that was a HUGE oversight on my part!

 

I was spammed by over 250 emails while traveling yesterday. I was constantly getting email alerts on my phone all day. I was finally able to remove it from my watchlist, but it drove me nuts. I'll never let that happen again.

 

No wonder my battery was constantly giving me warnings (even though I was charging it), every single email being pushed tot he phone just sucked all the juice out of it!

 

(With the bright outdoor sunlight, I wasn't able to "see" that I had to confirm the deletion. I attempted to delete it twice while I was out, but didn't do it right. )

[+Walts Hunting]

Since they were never listed on the froggie's website they weren't legitimate caches. Therefore none of those logs are legitimate.

 

But that won't stop the numbers people.

 

And lastly I would rather spend most of a day getting one or two good caches then moving with a group of lemmings from cache to cache. Doing one challenge tomorrow that will take most of the day and to qualify to even hunt this one you have to have found 20 ammo can caches since the publishing date. The other one is down a steep slope into a ditch and a scramble back out.

Edited May 30, 2010 by Walts Hunting

[+morts01]

 

But it's not really broken. I'd like to see find counts marked "private" first.

 

I suspect some people do it because they don't want everyone to see them as a noob. If you gave them a choice, they might choose privacy over bogus counts.

 

I would love it to be private as well as well as the caches I visit - find my logs via looking at caches is okay - but whose business is it to look at my find list and see where I've been.

[AZcachemeister]

Thanks to all for your input. I personally felt it was suspicious and strange to see multiple "attended" entries on the event page. I was there for the experience, not the numbers. I'm going to stay with what my original thoughts were and just say I attended the event - one entry, end of story.

Peace

 

Congratulations Princess!

 

You show wisdom far beyond your experience, and your GPSr shall display accurate numbers for years to come.

 

Cheers!