armchair caching

[+dorqie]

Other threads have got me scratching my head...

Anyone can just go arround logging false finds, whoop-de-doo.

Why tho? Why is that worth anyones time?

I've tried to wrap my head around this before, but I just don't get it. To say, "wow I got 1000 finds in a day!"?

But you know that you didn't... so why are you having fun?

[+Walts Hunting]

Everyone has their own vision of reality.

[+Chrysalides]

Why armchair logging?

• Because, despite everything, some people think that numbers matter
  
• Because some people don't realize it is "not how it is meant to be played". Some earlier geocaches can only be armchair logged *cough* Four Windows *cough*
  
• Because it creates so much angst in the forums
  

[+StarBrand]

Think some folks do it just to create angst.

[+dorqie]

but I like the numbers too. I like challenging myself to find a cirtain number of caches in a specific period of time.

But it's just that, challenging myself, to beat my own expectations.

Any knob can log false finds... I still am failing to see the joy in it...

[+gesharp]

Because they don't actually like being outdoors. They just like writing about it.

[+Hrethgir]

but I like the numbers too. I like challenging myself to find a cirtain number of caches in a specific period of time.

But it's just that, challenging myself, to beat my own expectations.

Any knob can log false finds... I still am failing to see the joy in it...

 

Some people just like to piss other people off, that's how they get their kicks. You get yours from finding caches, they get theirs by logging fake finds and waiting for the reaction.

[+DragonsWest]

Because they don't actually like being outdoors. They just like writing about it.

 

Hey now! That's the alien in you talking.

 

Hush up before they catch on to us Geocachers being the lost tribe of Sasquatch.

[+Ma&PaD]

Don't know if you would call our problem "arm chair" caching, but we have a cacher in our area who visited one of our caches - he has been the only one who has not been able to retrieve the cache - problem is, he posted a find with a comment that he could see the container, knew what it was and described it, but that he didn't have any special equipment to retrieve it (this cache does not require any special equipment) - and was claiming a find for it - if we didn't want to leave it on our log, we could delete - I visited with several that had found it and there was no problem with the cache, so therefore deleted his log - he has came back with more comments like he had been caching for 8 years and never had a log deleted - I guess, we as cachers, intend to play the game fairly and have never ever thought of logging a visit just because we could see the cache, but could not reach it - what a good way to get a 5 difficult rated cache - we have done some caches that we could not reach, but ended up getting a tool or string, or whatever to retrieve the cache - oh, and this gentleman I am referring to is our publisher in our area, who is someone who should know better...

[+DragonsWest]

Don't know if you would call our problem "arm chair" caching, but we have a cacher in our area who visited one of our caches - he has been the only one who has not been able to retrieve the cache - problem is, he posted a find with a comment that he could see the container, knew what it was and described it, but that he didn't have any special equipment to retrieve it (this cache does not require any special equipment) - and was claiming a find for it - if we didn't want to leave it on our log, we could delete - I visited with several that had found it and there was no problem with the cache, so therefore deleted his log - he has came back with more comments like he had been caching for 8 years and never had a log deleted - I guess, we as cachers, intend to play the game fairly and have never ever thought of logging a visit just because we could see the cache, but could not reach it - what a good way to get a 5 difficult rated cache - we have done some caches that we could not reach, but ended up getting a tool or string, or whatever to retrieve the cache - oh, and this gentleman I am referring to is our publisher in our area, who is someone who should know better...

 

Sounds like an issue with your cache publisher. I'm not certain what the policy is, but most reviewers in my neck of the woods keep (at least) two accounts, one for official work and one for geocaching. Yours sounds like a classic conflict of interest.

[4wheelin_fool]

Other threads have got me scratching my head...

Anyone can just go arround logging false finds, whoop-de-doo.

Why tho? Why is that worth anyones time?

I've tried to wrap my head around this before, but I just don't get it. To say, "wow I got 1000 finds in a day!"?

But you know that you didn't... so why are you having fun?

 

Because some people have nothing better to do than just playing on the computer all day, clicking links and doing things they ought not to.

 

By the way, I like the pics you posted on May 19.

[+dorqie]

Other threads have got me scratching my head...

Anyone can just go arround logging false finds, whoop-de-doo.

Why tho? Why is that worth anyones time?

I've tried to wrap my head around this before, but I just don't get it. To say, "wow I got 1000 finds in a day!"?

But you know that you didn't... so why are you having fun?

 

Because some people have nothing better to do than just playing on the computer all day, clicking links and doing things they ought not to.

 

By the way, I like the pics you posted on May 19.

thank you. those pics go with quite a story of an all day cache retrieval, and relate quite niceley to MaMa & PaPa D's situation, the cache in this case should not have been so difficult, but due to a wave knocking it, a seagull, or a cacher with really long arms, it had become more difficult than intdended. Lots of people were logging finds on it even tho they didn't actually retrieve the cache.

I didn't worry too much about anyone else, but it was an all day, two gal adventure, and we had a really good time with it.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Other threads have got me scratching my head...

Anyone can just go arround logging false finds, whoop-de-doo.

Why tho? Why is that worth anyones time?

 

As I've noted elsewhere, I am watching a missing cache. It was logged recently by someone who logged four caches in New York, and, on the same day, caches in East Timor, England, France Sao Paulo and the Czech Republic. 14 caches logged in one day!

[+DragonsWest]

Other threads have got me scratching my head...

Anyone can just go arround logging false finds, whoop-de-doo.

Why tho? Why is that worth anyones time?

 

As I've noted elsewhere, I am watching a missing cache. It was logged recently by someone who logged four caches in New York, and, on the same day, caches in East Timor, England, France Sao Paulo and the Czech Republic. 14 caches logged in one day!

 

A pair of geocachers came through our area and each logged finds on a cache which was long gone.

 

The best you can do is monitor your caches and delete their logs when you find them.

[DannyCaffeine]

Its a bunch of sissies obsessed with numbers and too afraid to go out there and get the cahce or are afriad of failing. DNF is not a failure its a try again. Its like falling off a bike. Just try again when your ready.

[+Chrysalides]

Its a bunch of [kosher? removed just in case] obsessed with numbers and too afraid to go out there and get the cahce or are afriad of failing. DNF is not a failure its a try again. Its like falling off a bike. Just try again when your ready.

Hey, Danny, go easy on the caffeine One possibility is that some of them are just trolling to get other geocachers outraged. I limit my reaction to rolling my eyes and not giving them the publicity they crave.

 

As for falling off a bike and trying again, so long as you're not doing this :

 

 

(no, I'm not defending the practice. this image just came to mind for some reason when I read your post )

[+dorqie]

Other threads have got me scratching my head...

Anyone can just go arround logging false finds, whoop-de-doo.

Why tho? Why is that worth anyones time?

 

As I've noted elsewhere, I am watching a missing cache. It was logged recently by someone who logged four caches in New York, and, on the same day, caches in East Timor, England, France Sao Paulo and the Czech Republic. 14 caches logged in one day!

 

A pair of geocachers came through our area and each logged finds on a cache which was long gone.

 

The best you can do is monitor your caches and delete their logs when you find them.

It's less of what to do about it, because that is pretty self explanitory, the question is why do it in the first place.

[Mr.Yuck]

Other threads have got me scratching my head...

Anyone can just go arround logging false finds, whoop-de-doo.

Why tho? Why is that worth anyones time?

 

As I've noted elsewhere, I am watching a missing cache. It was logged recently by someone who logged four caches in New York, and, on the same day, caches in East Timor, England, France Sao Paulo and the Czech Republic. 14 caches logged in one day!

 

A pair of geocachers came through our area and each logged finds on a cache which was long gone.

 

The best you can do is monitor your caches and delete their logs when you find them.

It's less of what to do about it, because that is pretty self explanitory, the question is why do it in the first place.

 

Why do it? I don't know, but I'd say it all basically boils down to being "about the numbers".

 

I think most will agree there are 3 factors behind European armchair Google finds of virtuals: 1) Several older virtuals, designed to be done armchair from home were "allowed" to exist. Almost all of these were in Europe 2) Monkey-see, Monkey-do. People over there see hundreds of virtual finds from all over the world in other people's profiles, and just go for it. That's probably where many of them find virts that are "googleable", by looking around in profiles of like minded people 3) The language barrier, and literal translation of the word virtual into other languages. Many people poo-poo this idea, but not me. For example, The UK is in Europe. I'm not seeing 100,000 armchair virtual logs saying "Greetings from The UK".

 

As far as bogus logs for physical caches, there was this retired guy from California. He logged physical caches all over the U.S. and Canada; about 2,000 of them in less than a year. I personally believe being retired, he actually was driving within a few miles of all these caches. He just decided that was close enough!! Of course he got all crazy, and was "caught" by dozens of cache owners. Eventually, Groundspeak stepped in and wiped his account clean.

 

Again, I'd have to think "about the numbers", wouldn't you?

[+BulldogBlitz]

Its a bunch of sissies obsessed with numbers and too afraid to go out there and get the cahce or are afriad of failing. DNF is not a failure its a try again. Its like falling off a bike. Just try again when your ready.

 

quit being an idiot. the bigger your find count, the bigger your discount at Hooters. so far, I'm up to a free basket of fries. if i armchair a few hundred tonight... i'll get a dessert.

 

so really, it isn't about being a sissy or scared. it's about being frugal.

[4wheelin_fool]

Its a bunch of sissies obsessed with numbers and too afraid to go out there and get the cahce or are afriad of failing. DNF is not a failure its a try again. Its like falling off a bike. Just try again when your ready.

 

quit being an idiot. the bigger your find count, the bigger your discount at Hooters. so far, I'm up to a free basket of fries. if i armchair a few hundred tonight... i'll get a dessert.

 

so really, it isn't about being a sissy or scared. it's about being frugal.

 

Liar. I'm at Hooters right now and they don't know anything about it. They do have a special on boneless wings though..

[+tozainamboku]

As far as bogus logs for physical caches, there was this retired guy from California. He logged physical caches all over the U.S. and Canada; about 2,000 of them in less than a year. I personally believe being retired, he actually was driving within a few miles of all these caches. He just decided that was close enough!! Of course he got all crazy, and was "caught" by dozens of cache owners. Eventually, Groundspeak stepped in and wiped his account clean.

 

Again, I'd have to think "about the numbers", wouldn't you?

I seriously doubt it's "about the numbers" except perhaps for a handful of cases. If someone is logging bogus finds just to get "big numbers", they're going to be spending many hours in front of a computer doing nothing but posting cut and paste logs. Not very much fun. Sure someone could write a program to automate logging finds, but they'd have to do a lot of work to avoid being detected by Groundspeak and getting metered. Anyone who logs bogus finds to get big numbers will either get bored before they get too far or they will get caught. Cache owners will be deleting logs and eventually Groundspeak will get involved and will ban the account.

 

No, I would guess that most people who log bogus logs do so because they are using the Found Log to keep track of something. The example you gave of the retired guy is good. Suppose he was visiting all those cache sites, he just never bothered to look for the caches there. He was using cache locations to find interesting places (or perhaps to find the Wal-Mart parking lot to park his RV for the night). He then marked all the places he had been to by logging a find. Same for the virtual couch potato loggers. They found an alternative game to play using virtual caches. If they could find the answers to the verification question on the Internet or in the library, they counted that as a "find" in the game they were playing. Even someone who isn't visiting the locations or finding the answers to the verification question, may be justifying posting found logs for some reason. Perhaps they found the location in Google Street view and were counting that experience.

 

I don't doubt that there are some people who do it just to see how long they can get away with it. Clearly you can log one or two bogus logs and nobody will notice except the occasional puritan cache owner who checks log books. Even then, you could delete your log and say you made a mistake and just log another cache elsewhere. I guess in a way these kinds of bogus loggers are motivated by numbers, but they must only be competing with other bogus loggers because these accounts won't last long enough to get on any leader board. I still think that most bogus logs are either errors or made by people who simply are using the Found It log for some reason that upsets the purists, and can mostly be ignored by people who really believe that numbers don't matter. (I say mostly because, as some people have pointed out, that there are cases where a bogus log effects what another geocacher might do. briansnat claims to know people who have driven 200 miles to find a cache just because it had a bogus find logged on it).

[+wimseyguy]

At the end of the day, the only person you are accountable to for your (logging) actions is the person you see in the mirror. I recently deleted a find on my virtual cache from someone with a new account who logged almost 100 virts all across the country on the same date. Perhaps those who engage in repetitive and abusive armchair logging of virtual caches get this type of gratification from this logging practice?

 

[+DragonflyTotem]

Why armchair logging?

• Because, despite everything, some people think that numbers matter
  
• Because some people don't realize it is "not how it is meant to be played". Some earlier geocaches can only be armchair logged *cough* Four Windows *cough*
  
• Because it creates so much angst in the forums
  

 

So can you only log armchairs, or are sofas allowed as well? And if an armchair and a sofa are both at the cache site, is that still just one find?

(Sorry, it's past dinner time and I'm possibly slipping toward silly.)