Jump to content

Correct Coordinates


Recommended Posts

Just recently, I have seen/heard several situations of people deliberately marking their coordinates away from the actual cache, just to throw people off and make the cache harder to find. Is this ethical, legal, devious but okay? What is the consensus? Thank for any input. :grin:

 

It is certainly a way to maximize the damage that can be done to an area. I would not consider it ethical, it certainly is devious. If they are doing it to up the difficulty level then they don't understand. If they do it on more than one cache I suspect all of their caches will end up on my ignore list. Probably other folks will ignore the caches also. Personally I think only a jerk would do that. If they want hard to find caches, then work on the cammo but post accurate co-ordinates. Those are fun and you feel a sense of accomplishment. With the others you feel a sense of frustration.

Link to comment

I personally find it just plain annoying. But that's just me :huh:

 

I'm not sure if it's legal or not.

 

Ethical? I don't think so. Here is a game where you use coordinates to find a cache...well not really, you can maybe use the coordinates or not...but we're not telling you if the coordinates are right, makes it harder. Hahaha...look how hard we made it by giving you the wrong numbers. :grin:

Link to comment

As I understand the it, the game of geocaching is to find containers hidden at the posted coordinates. The cache should be hidden only well enough to keep it from being carried off by muggles and should be as big as can be carried to the location and hidden.

 

For someone who uses "bad" coordinates, it makes it harder for someone with a GPS to find it, but does not make it any harder for a muggle to stumble upon it.

 

If I find someone is intentionally posting bad coordinates for a traditional cache, I'll just ignore all of their hides.

Link to comment
Is this ethical, legal, devious but okay?

 

No, it's not okay. perhaps the "soft coords" cacher should consider archiving the cache(s) from this service and listing them elsewhere. Here, they don't meet the guidelines.

 

If the cache is a traditional cache, the guideline says, " The coordinates listed on the traditional cache page are the exact location of the cache"

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

 

If the cache is an off-set multi, there still needs to be accurate coords and an accurate off-set. If the cache is a puzzle there still must be, "the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions."

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

 

I have considerable tolerance for coordinate drift in heavy cover. I'm slow to criticize bad coords. If I found it, the coords got me there, and if I didn't, I don't know.

But if the coords are clearly off (by say more than 45 feet) I'm probably going to post a waypoint with my log. This is a courtesy to other hunters and the cache owner. Sometimes the coords are bad because a previous finder moved the cache.

Link to comment

Just recently, I have seen/heard several situations of people deliberately marking their coordinates away from the actual cache, just to throw people off and make the cache harder to find. Is this ethical, legal, devious but okay? What is the consensus? Thank for any input. :grin:

 

It is certainly a way to maximize the damage that can be done to an area. I would not consider it ethical, it certainly is devious. If they are doing it to up the difficulty level then they don't understand. If they do it on more than one cache I suspect all of their caches will end up on my ignore list. Probably other folks will ignore the caches also. Personally I think only a jerk would do that. If they want hard to find caches, then work on the cammo but post accurate co-ordinates. Those are fun and you feel a sense of accomplishment. With the others you feel a sense of frustration.

+1

Link to comment

there are times when i suspect this happens... either that or the CO is just a little lazy trying to hide a cache quick and not re-checking the co-ordinates.

 

sometimes, the posted co-ordinates are within 40 feet of the cache...and no one says a word. other times, i've seen people raise hell for the co-ordinates being off by 2 seconds.

Link to comment

Bad coordinates don't make a cache harder. They just make people look in the wrong spot.

 

"Coordinate Bounce" happens, but if the coords are beyond a reasonable distance from where the GPS zeros out, many people will post a note in their log and add a waypoint to their log indicating the coordinates they had when they found the cache.

Edited by Skippermark
Link to comment

I think for one thing some are hiding caches and not taking the time to really get a good fix on their GPSr. This is really annoying and NOT fun. Another thing that irks me is some folks hiding caches and intentionally making them very difficult to find. Again, not fun, especially when they are in wooded, brushy, poison ivy laden places. To me enjoying geocaching is finding caches, not trying to make them impossible to find. I think some folks deliberately post coordinates that are off, thinking that is "cool". It isn't!!

Link to comment

Soft or fuzzy coords do not add anything positive to this game. They are annoying and can lead to excessive terrain damage by encouraging people to look in the wrong spot.

 

Anyone who does this deliberately needs to re-read the guidelines. There isn't a cure for sloppiness.

Link to comment

...people deliberately marking their coordinates away from the actual cache, just to throw people off and make the cache harder to find. Is this ethical, legal, devious but okay? What is the consensus? Thank for any input. :grin:

That's not what geocaching is about. I once read as well: "The coordinates are deliberately off, because geocaching is about searching." It was in a phone booth, the only possible hide in the surrounding area. Proofs that it must have been quite a stupid owner who likes to make other geocacher's day unnecessarily hard.

 

I posted the corrected coordinates with my log, expecting that it gets deleted due to this, but this didn't happen.

 

GermanSailor

Link to comment

If I find a cache that is 50ft or more from the listed coordinates, I usually just mention the "correct" coordinates in my log. I never say that the coordinates are wrong, just that "my GPS read 60 ft off. Folks might want to try these coordinates instead..." or some such safe wording.

 

There is a cache near where I work that is over 100 feet off. Someone got better coordinates by taking multiple readings, averaged over multiple days and posted it in a log. People keep re-posting the info so that new searchers can see it, but it still gets the occasional DNF because someone didn't see the logs before hand. Then they have to make a second trip.

 

Nobody should post bad coords on purpose--I understand that sometimes you just can't get good readings, but don't fudge it on purpose.

Link to comment

If the cache description doesn't say that soft coordinates were used intentionally, I'd try and be "helpful" by posting better coordinates in my log once I found the cache so that subsequent cachers wouldn't have to share the frustration searching the wrong location.

Link to comment

It is certainly a way to maximize the damage that can be done to an area. I would not consider it ethical, it certainly is devious. If they are doing it to up the difficulty level then they don't understand. If they do it on more than one cache I suspect all of their caches will end up on my ignore list. Probably other folks will ignore the caches also. Personally I think only a jerk would do that. If they want hard to find caches, then work on the cammo but post accurate co-ordinates. Those are fun and you feel a sense of accomplishment. With the others you feel a sense of frustration.

I agree, soft coordinates are a bad idea. But wouldn't a good camo job be maximizing damage to the area as well? If the searcher can't see it, then the search goes on, no?

Link to comment

It is certainly a way to maximize the damage that can be done to an area. I would not consider it ethical, it certainly is devious. If they are doing it to up the difficulty level then they don't understand. If they do it on more than one cache I suspect all of their caches will end up on my ignore list. Probably other folks will ignore the caches also. Personally I think only a jerk would do that. If they want hard to find caches, then work on the cammo but post accurate co-ordinates. Those are fun and you feel a sense of accomplishment. With the others you feel a sense of frustration.

I agree, soft coordinates are a bad idea. But wouldn't a good camo job be maximizing damage to the area as well? If the searcher can't see it, then the search goes on, no?

 

yes, but at least with a difficult hide you only have to look in a 20'? area, whereas with coordinates off by 50', you would have to look in a 100' area (not including your GPS's inaccuracy)

 

note: the OP did not mention 50'. It was just an arbitrary number.

Link to comment

Just recently, I have seen/heard several situations of people deliberately marking their coordinates away from the actual cache, just to throw people off and make the cache harder to find. Is this ethical, legal, devious but okay? What is the consensus? Thank for any input. :)

bad coords don't make a lame cache cool but it is a surefire way to get your hides in ignore lists.

Link to comment

From the Guidelines The coordinates listed on the traditional cache page are the exact location of the cache.

I would post the actual coordinates or post a need maintenance since the coordinates are off.

Once, I posted better coordinates for a cache and the cache owner told me to delete them. If a cache owner tells you to leave the coordinates alone when you know that they're clearly offset too much, that's grounds for an SBA.

Link to comment
If a cache owner tells you to leave the coordinates alone when you know that they're clearly offset too much, that's grounds for an SBA.

 

Why? If the owner deleted your log you might have a case. But just asking you to remove it is not necessarily grounds for archival or even to alert a reviewer.

 

Well, how about it is a violation of the guidelines. Per guidelines the listed co-ordinates for a traditional is the location of the the cache. Sounds to me more like an offset cache and that is a multi.

Link to comment

From the Guidelines The coordinates listed on the traditional cache page are the exact location of the cache.

I would post the actual coordinates or post a need maintenance since the coordinates are off.

Once, I posted better coordinates for a cache and the cache owner told me to delete them. If a cache owner tells you to leave the coordinates alone when you know that they're clearly offset too much, that's grounds for an SBA.

 

Indeed, deliberately offsetting the cache from the posted co-ords. is bogus.

 

Here in the Redwoods the trees and topography make for difficult times with respect to signals. In my case I simply post something to the effect that XX* XX.XXX / XXX*XX.XXX gave my electronic Tupperware finder less indigestion. So far cache owners have been tolerant.

 

In the past we have had hiders who find a place in a clearing, take a reading or two then proceed into the forest to hide the cache ... the sport mentors in this area have taken the misguided aside and there has been a modification in behavior. However, from time to time ...

Link to comment

Let me put it this way: any self-respecting geocacher with even a modicum of experience puts great pride in seeing the phrase, "coords were spot-on!" in the logs for their caches, and cringes and will run out for another reading if they hear "coords were a bit soft" or something like that. We pride ourselves on providing the very best coordinates possible. Deliberately providing misleading coordinates are a total embarrassment.

Link to comment

Let me put it this way: any self-respecting geocacher with even a modicum of experience puts great pride in seeing the phrase, "coords were spot-on!" in the logs for their caches, and cringes and will run out for another reading if they hear "coords were a bit soft" or something like that. We pride ourselves on providing the very best coordinates possible. Deliberately providing misleading coordinates are a total embarrassment.

 

Yup. On the few hides I have placed I have received that compliment a few times. It makes me happy to know that I have done my part correctly.

Link to comment

There is a town nearby that I've heard MULTIPLE experienced geocachers tell me to ignore and avoid because the hiders there believe soft coordinates make for a better hide. They follow some guideline I don't think I've ever seen that says something like, "If you can see the cache hiding spot from X coordinate then you have provided adequate coordinates". I mean, this is a whole TOWN that appears to have gone down this road! Do I believe everything I hear? no. But this town has such a bad reputation from MULTIPLE sources, I doubt I will cache much there!

Link to comment

There is a town nearby that I've heard MULTIPLE experienced geocachers tell me to ignore and avoid because the hiders there believe soft coordinates make for a better hide. They follow some guideline I don't think I've ever seen that says something like, "If you can see the cache hiding spot from X coordinate then you have provided adequate coordinates". I mean, this is a whole TOWN that appears to have gone down this road! Do I believe everything I hear? no. But this town has such a bad reputation from MULTIPLE sources, I doubt I will cache much there!

 

Interesting. I guess I'm pretty lucky. We just got our first soft-coorder ever in my area. And it's a teenaged kid who has never interacted with any Geocachers. So that'll tell you he came up with this great idea on his own. :grin: I've already ignored two, and a third that is in a store parking lot I would have ignored anyways. Can I ignore that one twice?

 

Direct quote from one of his cache pages: "I marked the coords off to make this one tricky."

Link to comment

There is a town nearby that I've heard MULTIPLE experienced geocachers tell me to ignore and avoid because the hiders there believe soft coordinates make for a better hide. They follow some guideline I don't think I've ever seen that says something like, "If you can see the cache hiding spot from X coordinate then you have provided adequate coordinates". I mean, this is a whole TOWN that appears to have gone down this road! Do I believe everything I hear? no. But this town has such a bad reputation from MULTIPLE sources, I doubt I will cache much there!

 

Interesting. I guess I'm pretty lucky. We just got our first soft-coorder ever in my area. And it's a teenaged kid who has never interacted with any Geocachers. So that'll tell you he came up with this great idea on his own. :grin: I've already ignored two, and a third that is in a store parking lot I would have ignored anyways. Can I ignore that one twice?

 

Direct quote from one of his cache pages: "I marked the coords off to make this one tricky."

 

With this 1 I think I would send an email to the young person & share the better way to do this. We had a new cacher in our area who did a cache like this. I sent her an email explaining this is not the best way to approach cache placement & write up. She was thankful for the inout as she didnt really know & has made the corrections. Her caches are now fun to hunt.

Link to comment

There is a town nearby that I've heard MULTIPLE experienced geocachers tell me to ignore and avoid because the hiders there believe soft coordinates make for a better hide. They follow some guideline I don't think I've ever seen that says something like, "If you can see the cache hiding spot from X coordinate then you have provided adequate coordinates". I mean, this is a whole TOWN that appears to have gone down this road! Do I believe everything I hear? no. But this town has such a bad reputation from MULTIPLE sources, I doubt I will cache much there!

 

Interesting. I guess I'm pretty lucky. We just got our first soft-coorder ever in my area. And it's a teenaged kid who has never interacted with any Geocachers. So that'll tell you he came up with this great idea on his own. :grin: I've already ignored two, and a third that is in a store parking lot I would have ignored anyways. Can I ignore that one twice?

 

Direct quote from one of his cache pages: "I marked the coords off to make this one tricky."

 

Hey TWU may I use your phrase " soft-corder ". Thanks in advance.

Link to comment

There is a town nearby that I've heard MULTIPLE experienced geocachers tell me to ignore and avoid because the hiders there believe soft coordinates make for a better hide. They follow some guideline I don't think I've ever seen that says something like, "If you can see the cache hiding spot from X coordinate then you have provided adequate coordinates". I mean, this is a whole TOWN that appears to have gone down this road! Do I believe everything I hear? no. But this town has such a bad reputation from MULTIPLE sources, I doubt I will cache much there!

 

Interesting. I guess I'm pretty lucky. We just got our first soft-coorder ever in my area. And it's a teenaged kid who has never interacted with any Geocachers. So that'll tell you he came up with this great idea on his own. :grin: I've already ignored two, and a third that is in a store parking lot I would have ignored anyways. Can I ignore that one twice?

 

Direct quote from one of his cache pages: "I marked the coords off to make this one tricky."

 

With this 1 I think I would send an email to the young person & share the better way to do this. We had a new cacher in our area who did a cache like this. I sent her an email explaining this is not the best way to approach cache placement & write up. She was thankful for the inout as she didnt really know & has made the corrections. Her caches are now fun to hunt.

 

Yes Humboldt, go ahead and use it. :lol:

 

Good point Mother Wolf. As rude as I might sound with a "to heck with that, I'm ignoring this kids caches", it is also very uncomfortable emailing someone with unsolicited advice, without coming off as an obnoxious, meddling know-it-all. I believe I will give it a try though.

Link to comment

There is a town nearby that I've heard MULTIPLE experienced geocachers tell me to ignore and avoid because the hiders there believe soft coordinates make for a better hide. They follow some guideline I don't think I've ever seen that says something like, "If you can see the cache hiding spot from X coordinate then you have provided adequate coordinates". I mean, this is a whole TOWN that appears to have gone down this road! Do I believe everything I hear? no. But this town has such a bad reputation from MULTIPLE sources, I doubt I will cache much there!

 

I have a vague recollection of reading something like that when I started... However, that said, it was in reference to otherwise EASY level caches... the implied intent being within a reasonable EPE range.

 

In my case until recently, 8 to 10 metres was the best I could expect for EPE... but I still found even micros... with a little searching. So they may simply be OLD SCHOOL like me. I still hunt that way, but..

Now have a newer GPS as backup... There are ways around such limitations and I still enjoy that challenge, but that is a personal choice.

 

That said, I do believe that the best possible coordinates should be provided for traditional caches, but once upon a time best was a bit less than today. Eventually, the concept of 'soft' might be desirable, once we get down to cm. accuracy.. does anyone really want to just walk up to a cache... boring.

 

Doug 7rxc

Link to comment

"I marked the coords off to make this one tricky."

 

NA - guidelines violation

 

C'mon now, Mother Wolf already made me sound like a snob. :o I'm going to try to diplomatically email the kid.

 

Ironically enough, I was surfing some listings for caching this weekend. And if I'm lying I'm dying, I saw this note posted by a different new (and I assume young) cache hider: "yes, i made the coords slightly off so you'd actually have to search a bit! It's in an obvious place so it should not be that hard."

 

Woe is me. :o

Link to comment
Eventually, the concept of 'soft' might be desirable, once we get down to cm. accuracy.. does anyone really want to just walk up to a cache... boring.

 

I do!

 

I enjoy getting outdoors, going new places, finding caches. Poking the same spot with my hiking stick for twenty minutes is not enjoyable to me.

Link to comment

TWU: no no, never a snob : > )

 

Some folks will be resentful no matter how diplomatic a topic is broached. The gal I was speaking about had great locations for her caches & good ideas just executed poorly. ie; a nano in a piece of broken tree branch. An ok concept except the branch piece was rotted & full of bugs then just dropped amongst the other dead debris. I suggested that perhaps she find a god piece of branch, treat it so it wouldnt get bug infested & try that. yes it meant some extra work but she did that & it has been there now for almost a yr with regular visits & logs. Since that time she even sent me an email asking my opinion on another cache she wanted to place. All in all, a compliment for me & in turn I think a CO with better caches now. It only cost me a few mins to send the email so nothing lost & alot gained.

 

As for the other cacher you mentioned.....we cant help them all but as an experienced cacher we can try to help improve some & bring the over all standards back up.......just a thought. : > )

Link to comment
As rude as I might sound with a "to heck with that, I'm ignoring this kids caches",

 

Hey now, that kid (one of them anyways) is a GIRL. You would be rude to a weak, helpless, mentally inferior girl? You would brutishly ignore her cute little caches? She thought she was being clever with her soft coords, poor thing. Come on, one of her hides is called "Skurdibbles!". Sure, I don't have a clue what that means either, but who am I to quash her girlish enthusiasms?

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...