Numbers count

[+L0ne.R]

Sure. I'm definitely not saying all find counts should be invisible. If others care about their numbers let them have fun, but allow me to opt-out. Competitive numbers-people can still have fun amongst themselves without seeing my find count.

You didn't answer my question. Why does it bother you that they're looking at your number? Do you have some kind of paranoid neurosis? (With a handle of Lone R, I just might be right )

 

I have yet to hear a good answer to that question (the first one) from anyone.

 

It's not so much about hiding my numbers as apposed to making a statement that numbers don't matter.

[+L0ne.R]

The best option is to just not worry about how others perceive you (find count, hair style, clothing choices, the vehicle you drive, what neighborhood you live in, how you voted in the last election....), be yourself and be happy!

 

It's not about how others perceive me wrt my find count. (What's important to me is how we are perceived with regards to our hides - whether our hides get good feedback and people consider them quality caches.) Perception wrt to my find count doesn't effect me one bit....never even considered it.

 

It's about geocaching becoming more and more about the numbers. How often do you see someone put out an LPC and in the description actually say that they placed it so that people could get a smiley. More and more hiders seem to think that the point of geocaching is to get a smiley. We need to de-emphasize smiley counts.

Edited July 15, 2010 by Lone R

[+Team Cotati]

Wow, did you do that without the aid of a calculator?

Did you actually go and check that it was his actual find count? Wow. Some people are obsessed about the numbers.

 

No, I am just too impressed I suppose.

[+Team Cotati]

The best option is to just not worry about how others perceive you (find count, hair style, clothing choices, the vehicle you drive, what neighborhood you live in, how you voted in the last election....), be yourself and be happy!

 

It's not about how others perceive me wrt my find count. (What's important to me is how we are perceived with regards to our hides - whether our hides get good feedback and people consider them quality caches.) Perception wrt to my find count doesn't effect me one bit....never even considered it.

 

It's about geocaching becoming more and more about the numbers. How often do you see someone put out an LPC and in the description actually say that they placed it so that people could get a smiley. More and more hiders seem to think that the point of geocaching is to get a smiley. We need to de-emphasize smiley counts.

 

We?

[+Avernar]

It's not so much about hiding my numbers as apposed to making a statement that numbers don't matter.

I suspected this was a reason. Glad finally someone admitted it. Making a political statement is still not a valid reason to butcher the site.

 

Numbers don't matter to you. They matter to other people. That's the great thing about this game/hobby. Everyone gets to play it the way they want. You can still play it as a non numbers game the way the site is now.

 

Unfortunately if we let everyone hide their count then the people that do want to compete in the numbers game, even if it's one sided, are not going to be able to. All because some people want to make a "statement".

 

It's not about how others perceive me wrt my find count. (What's important to me is how we are perceived with regards to our hides - whether our hides get good feedback and people consider them quality caches.) Perception wrt to my find count doesn't effect me one bit....never even considered it.

This is exactly my point.

 

It's about geocaching becoming more and more about the numbers. How often do you see someone put out an LPC and in the description actually say that they placed it so that people could get a smiley. More and more hiders seem to think that the point of geocaching is to get a smiley. We need to de-emphasize smiley counts.

Now you're trying to impose your beliefs on someone else. This I have an issue with. What's wrong with people putting out caches so other people can get a quick find?

 

Why do we need to de-emphasize smiley counts? Let people play the game the way they want. Almost all cachers I've met were a numbers hound at some point. Some still are. Most that stay with the game get tired of just finding mindless cache after mindless cache and start going after more interesting ones. Around my area there's been a great deal of activity on completing challenge caches with people going all over the province to get qualifying caches.

 

Groundspeak has actually promoted the numbers game by allowing power trails (Trail of the Gods anyone?). Some people think that's cool and want to do these power trails. Others don't and prefer quality or quantity. And the site already lets you filter out all the easy ones from your PQs.

[+Avernar]

No, I am just too impressed I suppose.

I still can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

Edited July 15, 2010 by Avernar

[+L0ne.R]

The best option is to just not worry about how others perceive you (find count, hair style, clothing choices, the vehicle you drive, what neighborhood you live in, how you voted in the last election....), be yourself and be happy!

 

It's not about how others perceive me wrt my find count. (What's important to me is how we are perceived with regards to our hides - whether our hides get good feedback and people consider them quality caches.) Perception wrt to my find count doesn't effect me one bit....never even considered it.

 

It's about geocaching becoming more and more about the numbers. How often do you see someone put out an LPC and in the description actually say that they placed it so that people could get a smiley. More and more hiders seem to think that the point of geocaching is to get a smiley. We need to de-emphasize smiley counts.

 

We?

 

Our hides are under our team account. We've been placing caches since 2002.

[+thedeadpirate]

Unfortunately if we let everyone hide their count then the people that do want to compete in the numbers game, even if it's one sided, are not going to be able to. All because some people want to make a "statement".

 

How would allowing cachers to opt-out affect the people who choose to remain in the numbers game? None of the numbers mean anything to begin with.

 

Are you afraid that there are more cachers willing to opt-out than you think?

 

Groundspeak has actually promoted the numbers game by allowing power trails (Trail of the Gods anyone?).

 

Which is ironic since they still include the "Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can" line in the guidelines.

[+L0ne.R]

It's not so much about hiding my numbers as apposed to making a statement that numbers don't matter.

I suspected this was a reason. Glad finally someone admitted it. Making a political statement is still not a valid reason to butcher the site.

 

I think privacy and a desire to de-emphasize the numbers game are valid reasons.

 

Unfortunately if we let everyone hide their count then the people that do want to compete in the numbers game, even if it's one sided, are not going to be able to. All because some people want to make a "statement".

 

I doubt there would be many people who would opt-out of displaying their find count on logs. My guess, maybe 10% of cachers. Even if it were 50% then you'll still be able to compete with the other 50% who display their numbers. Wouldn't you prefer to compete with others who are like minded?

 

Groundspeak has actually promoted the numbers game by allowing power trails (Trail of the Gods anyone?). Some people think that's cool and want to do these power trails. Others don't and prefer quality or quantity. And the site already lets you filter out all the easy ones from your PQs.

 

There in lies part of the problem, GS is promoting numbers. But they haven't provided a method to filter out power trails - like a PT attribute or a PT type. Currently you have to ignore each individual PT cache separately. So those of us who don't want to play the PT game and don't want to get 100s of PT cache announcements in our email or on our maps, we don't have the option to play the game the way we want to.

[+thedeadpirate]

I doubt there would be many people who would opt-out of displaying their find count on logs. My guess, maybe 10% of cachers. Even if it were 50% then you'll still be able to compete with the other 50% who display their numbers. Wouldn't you prefer to compete with others who are like minded?

 

If only 10% would opt-out, then it's not really worth the trouble to put the switch in. I'm guessing it would be a bit higher than that.

 

But as you said, if it were 50% displaying their numbers, then you still have people to compete with.

 

It's just like the FTF hounds. Groundspeak does not keep that stat, but that doesn't slow down the competition.

[+Avernar]

How would allowing cachers to opt-out affect the people who choose to remain in the numbers game? None of the numbers mean anything to begin with.

It just gives them less information to work with. For example, some people set a goal for themselves to reach a certain number of finds in one year. What's a realistic target number? They need to go find others with a similar caching style and see what they at and how fast their number is increasing. In this case it's not a competition even. But if most of the experienced cachers (they're the ones that seem to want to hide) can't be looked at then they're out of luck.

 

Are you afraid that there are more cachers willing to opt-out than you think?

It's a possibility. But I'm thinking it's going to be the higher numbered cachers that would do it. That would skew the range of find numbers to work with.

 

If it's easy to do then too many people might just because it's there. Or the next crusade by people will be to default it to hidden for all new accounts.

[+Team Cotati]

The best option is to just not worry about how others perceive you (find count, hair style, clothing choices, the vehicle you drive, what neighborhood you live in, how you voted in the last election....), be yourself and be happy!

 

It's not about how others perceive me wrt my find count. (What's important to me is how we are perceived with regards to our hides - whether our hides get good feedback and people consider them quality caches.) Perception wrt to my find count doesn't effect me one bit....never even considered it.

 

It's about geocaching becoming more and more about the numbers. How often do you see someone put out an LPC and in the description actually say that they placed it so that people could get a smiley. More and more hiders seem to think that the point of geocaching is to get a smiley. We need to de-emphasize smiley counts.

 

We?

 

Our hides are under our team account. We've been placing caches since 2002.

 

That is really good to know.

 

I am still left wondering though who is the 'we' that needs to be doing a better job of de-emphasizing smiley counts and why 'we' ought to spend time doing that.

 

And to whose benefit?

Edited July 15, 2010 by Team Cotati

[+thedeadpirate]

How would allowing cachers to opt-out affect the people who choose to remain in the numbers game? None of the numbers mean anything to begin with.

It just gives them less information to work with. For example, some people set a goal for themselves to reach a certain number of finds in one year. What's a realistic target number? They need to go find others with a similar caching style and see what they at and how fast their number is increasing. In this case it's not a competition even. But if most of the experienced cachers (they're the ones that seem to want to hide) can't be looked at then they're out of luck.

 

Meh. People can set their own goals simply by figuring out who they're gunning for and the time frame in which they wish to overtake them.

 

Are you afraid that there are more cachers willing to opt-out than you think?

It's a possibility. But I'm thinking it's going to be the higher numbered cachers that would do it. That would skew the range of find numbers to work with.

 

If it's easy to do then too many people might just because it's there. Or the next crusade by people will be to default it to hidden for all new accounts.

 

If there is a sufficient percentage of cachers that would use the feature, then it should at least be considered. It doesn't matter on what end of the spectrum they fall.

 

I will give you this. You could make a decent argument in regards with higher number cachers turning their count off while doing a quick buildup so that their competition can't see them accelerating.

 

But the numbers folks are all honorable anyway, right.

[+tozainamboku]

Sure. I'm definitely not saying all find counts should be invisible. If others care about their numbers let them have fun, but allow me to opt-out. Competitive numbers-people can still have fun amongst themselves without seeing my find count.

You didn't answer my question. Why does it bother you that they're looking at your number? Do you have some kind of paranoid neurosis? (With a handle of Lone R, I just might be right )

 

I have yet to hear a good answer to that question (the first one) from anyone.

 

It's not so much about hiding my numbers as apposed to making a statement that numbers don't matter.

Only it makes the opposite statement.

 

Certainly the presence of the find count allows those who want use the number for some "nefarious" purpose to do so. The problem is that you view the numbers themselves as the root of all evil in geocaching. Those who are enjoying seeing their own find counts go up and not going to care one bit that Lone R has hidded his number. They will continue to find as many caches as they can and will continue to enjoy LPCs and power trails because they see big numbers from doing these. They may continue to have friendly competitions to see who can find more and to celebrate milestones when their found count hits a round number. If someone wanted, they could even compare themselves to Lone R but looking as his profile to seem the number of finds he has. Removing the find count from everyone might slow down some of the games people play with numbers but would hardly put a stop to it. The problem is that some people enjoy numbers and statistics as part of the game, just as some people enjoy moving travel bugs or collecting coins. Others find the find count a useful first estimated of how active a geocacher someone is. That can be helpful in deciding how to respond to a DNF or in finding someone to go geocaching with.

 

If the numbers don't matter to you, the best way to project that is to let people know that you are having fun independent of what your find count is. When you hide your find count, there is some implication that the number does matter to you, or at least that it matters to you that the numbers might matter to someone else.

Edited July 15, 2010 by tozainamboku

[CoyoteRed]

...like someone said already, don't want a visible count, don't log...even though the nature of the game is to keep track of your finds

 

Really? I thought the nature of the hobby is to get outside and find a box with your GPS. I guess I've been doing it all wrong all of this time.

 

As for no one ever having a valid reason to hide find counts, I could say there is no valid reason to show find counts. The number of Found logs does not directly correspond to the veracity of any statement made or log entered. I learned this long ago when the at-the-time lead cacher (by find count) logged a find on a cache and the log text text indicated it was missing. "WHAT?!" Claiming a find and didn't find it? The cache is missing? Sissy went out immediately--a 45 minute trip one way--only to discover the cache was actually there. It's wasn't a hard cache either. She simply stopped looking after a short time and claimed the find anyway. I've found this to be indicative to many a high number cacher to a lesser or greater degree. Not saying they all claim a find on a missing cache, but will quit looking quicker than a more casual seeker.

 

So who's the better cacher? The person logs more caches or the one who always takes care of the environment and the cache, gives the hide a good effort before giving up and logging a DNF, who enjoys more quality caches on more regular basis?

 

Unfortunately, many think the high number cachers are the better cacher simply because they find massive numbers of traditional park-n-grabs. So, regardless of whether you're going to play the numbers game, folks will look at your count and judge you. But I suppose not wanting to be judged by my find count versus what I did for the caching community is not a valid reason for wanting to hide my find count.

 

Finders are takers.

 

Hiders are givers.

 

Hiders of quality caches are better givers than those who hide the trache.

 

Too bad the biggest celebrities are also the biggest takers in this hobby.

[+Avernar]

I think privacy and a desire to de-emphasize the numbers game are valid reasons.

Claiming privacy concerns over public information is not a valid reason. Even if the information was not easily available, it would still be publicly obtainable. That's like claiming what car you drive is private information.

 

While the desire to de-emphasize the numbers game can be accomplished in other ways. You need to show people something better first. Taking away something people like will just get them mad at you.

 

I doubt there would be many people who would opt-out of displaying their find count on logs. My guess, maybe 10% of cachers. Even if it were 50% then you'll still be able to compete with the other 50% who display their numbers. Wouldn't you prefer to compete with others who are like minded?

From what I've gathered on the forums it will be the veterans who will most likely do this. Their the ones that the newer players strive for as a personal target.

 

When I did compete it was with people my own level. But it was way cool setting future goals based on the more active players out there.

 

There in lies part of the problem, GS is promoting numbers. But they haven't provided a method to filter out power trails - like a PT attribute or a PT type. Currently you have to ignore each individual PT cache separately. So those of us who don't want to play the PT game and don't want to get 100s of PT cache announcements in our email or on our maps, we don't have the option to play the game the way we want to.

This I agree with you. There should be a way to filter out power trails. Some of the big ones will take out a complete PQ.

[+Avernar]

Meh. People can set their own goals simply by figuring out who they're gunning for and the time frame in which they wish to overtake them.

Which is more difficult when you don't know what's possible or not. How many cachers when they started would even dream it's possible to accumulate hundreds or thousands of finds?

 

If there is a sufficient percentage of cachers that would use the feature, then it should at least be considered. It doesn't matter on what end of the spectrum they fall.

There are those who feel passionately about the issue, and then there are those that would do it because it's there. It's the "I've seen others do it so I'll do it too even though I don't know why it's a good or bad thing to do" that I'm concerned about.

 

I will give you this. You could make a decent argument in regards with higher number cachers turning their count off while doing a quick buildup so that their competition can't see them accelerating.

Wow. You've got a devious mind! I never thought of that.

 

But the numbers folks are all honorable anyway, right.

A lot are. But every group has it's bad apples.

[+Avernar]

Really? I thought the nature of the hobby is to get outside and find a box with your GPS. I guess I've been doing it all wrong all of this time.

And step number 8: Share your geocaching stories and photos online.

 

It's a public online social activity too.

 

As for no one ever having a valid reason to hide find counts, I could say there is no valid reason to show find counts.

As much as you don't like it, the numbers competition is a valid reason. People have fun doing it.

 

The number of Found logs does not directly correspond to the veracity of any statement made or log entered. <snip> I've found this to be indicative to many a high number cacher to a lesser or greater degree. Not saying they all claim a find on a missing cache, but will quit looking quicker than a more casual seeker.

As I've written before, the number is a good first indicator until you find out otherwise. I've seen this before too.

 

So who's the better cacher? The person logs more caches or the one who always takes care of the environment and the cache, gives the hide a good effort before giving up and logging a DNF, who enjoys more quality caches on more regular basis?

Most definitely the second type. We have a quite a few of those around here. When they DNF something, odds are it is missing.

 

What I'm saying is that you first notice those people because they have a higher find count (ie, are more active) and then start following their logs to see what they're up to.

 

Unfortunately, many think the high number cachers are the better cacher simply because they find massive numbers of traditional park-n-grabs. So, regardless of whether you're going to play the numbers game, folks will look at your count and judge you. But I suppose not wanting to be judged by my find count versus what I did for the caching community is not a valid reason for wanting to hide my find count.

That will take education. Yes, people will judge you by your find count at first just as the judge you by your appearance.

 

But you can use your find count to start the education process. If someone asks you why your count is low for example, tell them you like challenging caches and educate them why finding these caches is better. Tell them some of your adventure stories so they'll think "Wow. That sounds like way more fun than what I'm doing. I'm going to try that."

 

Finders are takers.

Only the ones that don't log online. When someone shares their experience they're giving something back to the CO.

 

Too bad the biggest celebrities are also the biggest takers in this hobby.

Hey, there's a goal for you. Become a big celebrity and show that you're not a big taker.

[+Avernar]

The problem is that some people enjoy numbers and statistics as part of the game

I wouldn't call it a problem. While I don't compete in the find count anymore, I do like statistics.

 

Statistics give a much broader indication of a cacher's activities than just their find count. I love seeing what Countries and Provinces/States others have visited. Their highest and lowest elevations. Their DT Matrix. The find counts on their hidden caches.

 

Some people put those achievement badges on their profiles. I love seeing what goals others are setting for themselves.

 

It brings the community together. Especially for those who are skittish about attending events.

 

If the numbers don't matter to you, the best way to project that is to let people know that you are having fun independent of what your find count is. When you hide your find count, there is some implication that the number does matter to you, or at least that it matters to you that the numbers might matter to someone else.

Exactly!

[+thedeadpirate]

Meh. People can set their own goals simply by figuring out who they're gunning for and the time frame in which they wish to overtake them.

Which is more difficult when you don't know what's possible or not. How many cachers when they started would even dream it's possible to accumulate hundreds or thousands of finds?

 

It doesn't seem to be a problem with the FTF hounds. A relatively small percentage of the overall caching population actively pursue this competition. GC doesn't keep score. But they know who their competition is.

 

Ok, I realize it's a bit easier to keep up with your competition when you are constantly running into them on the trail. But people talk at events. People import their stats into their profile. And, since we're not talking about doing away with the numbers altogether, the numbers people would still have their numbers showing.

 

You would know it's possible to accumulate thousands of finds by spending time at events and listening to the banter or reading about it on the forums, in addition to the fact that a lot of cachers are going to choose not to opt-out because the numbers game IS the game to them.

 

Wow. You've got a devious mind! I never thought of that.

 

I do try to think outside the box and consider the other side's concerns when discussing an issue such as this. It's one reason I haven't proposed the total removal of the find count. I do realize its importance to a lot of cachers.

 

We've got a number of competitive cachers in our local caching group. They are VERY passionate about it. I backed off quite a bit on the power trail debate because of it. While I find it personally ridiculous, a number of them pointed out that they are generally placed out away from dense population groups and therefore should have little impact on cacher's trying to get their PQ's without them. I still feel there should be a PT attribute to allow them to be filtered out. But if a group of cachers is willing to drive from Florida all the way out to Nevada just to run the trail, it MUST have some value. Right?

 

But the numbers folks are all honorable anyway, right.

A lot are. But every group has it's bad apples.

 

Unfortunately, that applies to geocaching as a whole.

[+thedeadpirate]

Finders are takers.

Only the ones that don't log online. When someone shares their experience they're giving something back to the CO.

 

That one is debatable regardless of whether they're a numbers cacher or not.

 

I am tempted to say that high number cachers tend to be takers. But, at least around here, most of the high number cachers also put out a lot of caches.

 

I like my little area of the geocaching universe.

[+thedeadpirate]

I love seeing what Countries and Provinces/States others have visited.

I'm not much interested in stats overall, but I do enjoy seeing the state maps.

[+Avernar]

It doesn't seem to be a problem with the FTF hounds. A relatively small percentage of the overall caching population actively pursue this competition. GC doesn't keep score. But they know who their competition is.

Yes, but they also do compete with the non FTF crowd. Several times a non FTF hound has sniped an FTF around here. It's actually quite amusing to watch sometimes.

 

But you've made my point. The non FTF cachers simply ignore the FTF hounds and life goes on. You don't see them asking for a log filter that will block out the letters FTF in found logs.

 

You would know it's possible to accumulate thousands of finds by spending time at events and listening to the banter or reading about it on the forums, in addition to the fact that a lot of cachers are going to choose not to opt-out because the numbers game IS the game to them.

I personally know a few cachers that don't go to events. And there's a heck of a lot more that stay away from the forums like the plague.

 

But if a group of cachers is willing to drive from Florida all the way out to Nevada just to run the trail, it MUST have some value. Right?

Yup. Everything has it's place. A year ago, that power trail would have been irresistible to me. It might be again in the future.

[+thedeadpirate]

You don't see them asking for a log filter that will block out the letters FTF in found logs.

No one is asking for a filter that will block out numbers in found logs if someone chooses to post them either. If someone chooses to post that in their log, why would you want to block it? Same with their profile. If someone takes the time to run their finds pq through GSAK and post the results to their profile, they should have that option.

 

You would know it's possible to accumulate thousands of finds by spending time at events and listening to the banter or reading about it on the forums, in addition to the fact that a lot of cachers are going to choose not to opt-out because the numbers game IS the game to them.

I personally know a few cachers that don't go to events. And there's a heck of a lot more that stay away from the forums like the plague.

Notice the "in addition to the fact that a lot of cachers are going to choose not to opt-out". You wouldn't need to go to an event or onto the forums unless everyone opt'ed out. But if everyone opts out, then that would be pretty strong support for removing the find count, wouldn't it?

[+Avernar]

No one is asking for a filter that will block out numbers in found logs if someone chooses to post them either. If someone chooses to post that in their log, why would you want to block it? Same with their profile. If someone takes the time to run their finds pq through GSAK and post the results to their profile, they should have that option.

That wasn't my point as the two are not quite the same. My point is that both problems are solved by just ignoring them. It's the simplest solution and the one that takes the least effort to implement.

 

And as Toz mentioned before, hiding it would have the opposite effect. People would want to know your find count and go out of their way to figure it out.

 

Notice the "in addition to the fact that a lot of cachers are going to choose not to opt-out". You wouldn't need to go to an event or onto the forums unless everyone opt'ed out. But if everyone opts out, then that would be pretty strong support for removing the find count, wouldn't it?

If everyone opted out because they really felt strongly about it. But we'd get a lot of the me too's and people turning on the option because they don't know what it does, and the possibility that it will become an opt in instead of an opt out.

[+northernpenguin]

I'm really having difficulty with this "privacy" argument. How many people are signing caches with their real name? If people are connecting your real name with your Geocaching.com alias, it is because you chose to share that information. Setup a new account, and don't tell people who you are. Act like a reviewer and tell people about your old account while signing into caches under your new alias. It's not like we're supplying our driver's licence number to Geocaching.com for pete's sake.

 

--

 

The find counts are simply an amusing bit of information for 80% of Geocachers, and an obsession for 10% while an annoyance for another 10% (yes, numbers are pulled out of derriere so no reason to quibble them).

 

These numbers are also quite beneficial for Geocaching's marketing as they demonstrate a bit of an activity level that can be marketed. It shows people who look at a cache listing that people sign up for the game, and that many of them _keep doing it_. Yes, there are a lot of people that find 3 caches and are never seen again. Most cache listings have several logs with finders with hundreds or thousands of finds - this can be useful to show the curious.

 

As I've said in other forums, they are also typically used as a baseline for a log entry by many. Guarantee? Heck no - there are exceptions to everything, but I will happily admit to a bias when interpreting DNF logs or recent logs in the field. If a newbie found it yesterday it means I'm doing the hunt wrong. If a newbie reports SBA or NM on my cache I will conduct research before taking action like visiting the cache site. I'm not going to hike out to check a cache 5km from the road based on one DNF from a person with 1 find, 0 hides.

[+Team Cotati]

I love seeing what Countries and Provinces/States others have visited.

I'm not much interested in stats overall, but I do enjoy seeing the state maps.

 

Me neither. The main reason is that there are not enough categories for the various stats.

Just as soon as there is a stat for the Number of finds on the second Tuesday in months without an 'r' in their name, THEN I might climb on board the six ways from Sunday stat train.

 

Until then, I'll just continue pondering the silliness of it.

 

The operative word in there is 'might'.

[+thedeadpirate]

And as Toz mentioned before, hiding it would have the opposite effect. People would want to know your find count and go out of their way to figure it out.

 

Not if a lot of people chose to opt-out. And even being a lone wolf, I haven't seen anyone hiding in the bushes trying to get a look at my find count.

 

Notice the "in addition to the fact that a lot of cachers are going to choose not to opt-out". You wouldn't need to go to an event or onto the forums unless everyone opt'ed out. But if everyone opts out, then that would be pretty strong support for removing the find count, wouldn't it?

If everyone opted out because they really felt strongly about it. But we'd get a lot of the me too's and people turning on the option because they don't know what it does, and the possibility that it will become an opt in instead of an opt out.

 

On the first concern, you're not giving people much credit.

 

On the second point, I agree that defaulting to opt-out would be effectively the same as doing away with it. But with all those people who can't help but flip the switch because other's are doing it or they don't know what it does, then maybe they should make it the default. (Not really, but I hope you see how your first concern conflicts with your second one.)

[+Avernar]

Not if a lot of people chose to opt-out.

Just because a lot of people do it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

 

There's a lot of things on the web site that a lot of people want but Groundspeak won't do because it would hurt the game.

 

On the first concern, you're not giving people much credit.

Never heard of the term "Sheeple"? A person is smart. People are dumb.

 

On the second point, I agree that defaulting to opt-out would be effectively the same as doing away with it. But with all those people who can't help but flip the switch because other's are doing it or they don't know what it does, then maybe they should make it the default. (Not really, but I hope you see how your first concern conflicts with your second one.)

No conflict as anything more than a small handful of cachers hiding there finds is detrimental. Opt in even with the sheeple would still be worse.

[+thedeadpirate]

Not if a lot of people chose to opt-out.

Just because a lot of people do it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

 

There's a lot of things on the web site that a lot of people want but Groundspeak won't do because it would hurt the game.

 

This ain't one of 'em.

 

No conflict as anything more than a small handful of cachers hiding there finds is detrimental. Opt in even with the sheeple would still be worse.

 

On this we just have to agree to disagree. In my opinion, if half the people opted-out (I'm in favor of opt-out, not default hide and then opt-in), then the numbers people could still have their competition.

 

If 75% or more opt-out, then it might affect the numbers game. But if there are that many opting out, you gotta reconsider the whole numbers game anyway.

[+thedeadpirate]

P.S. I agree with the person/smart, people/dumb statement. But every time I say it, I come off as condescending, so I try to stay clear of that in the written word.

[+Avernar]

There's a lot of things on the web site that a lot of people want but Groundspeak won't do because it would hurt the game.

This ain't one of 'em.

Yes it most definitely is.

 

The reasons for showing the find count are that it's adds to the fun for many players and as northernpenguin mentioned it's a good indication that the game is actively being played. The reasons for hiding it is that it somehow magically protects your privacy and that it makes a statement.

 

On this we just have to agree to disagree. In my opinion, if half the people opted-out (I'm in favor of opt-out, not default hide and then opt-in), then the numbers people could still have their competition.

 

If 75% or more opt-out, then it might affect the numbers game. But if there are that many opting out, you gotta reconsider the whole numbers game anyway.

Sorry. I choose not to agree to disagree. We're not even close on what the percentages would be. I'm thinking at most 5-10% would opt out. And that's still too big of a number for the problems it would cause.

[+thedeadpirate]

On this we just have to agree to disagree. In my opinion, if half the people opted-out (I'm in favor of opt-out, not default hide and then opt-in), then the numbers people could still have their competition.

 

If 75% or more opt-out, then it might affect the numbers game. But if there are that many opting out, you gotta reconsider the whole numbers game anyway.

Sorry. I choose not to agree to disagree. We're not even close on what the percentages would be. I'm thinking at most 5-10% would opt out. And that's still too big of a number for the problems it would cause.

 

If you reread what I said, I didn't say half the people would opt-out. I said IF half of them opted-out, it still wouldn't affect the competition.

 

But you don't have to agree to disagree on that. You can continue to voice your opinion, but I'm not going to go round and round with it. The only way to know is to do it and check to numbers. Everything else is speculation.

[+Avernar]

If you reread what I said, I didn't say half the people would opt-out. I said IF half of them opted-out, it still wouldn't affect the competition.

I did misread but it doesn't change anything. If half did opt-out it would affect things. Having half the people in Geocaching telling you that what you like about the game is stupid wouldn't affect you?

 

And I'm not only talking about the numbers competition. What would it look like to outsiders looking in to see what Geocaching is about? Having half the members pretending to be elitist and not participate looks pretty bad.

 

But you don't have to agree to disagree on that. You can continue to voice your opinion, but I'm not going to go round and round with it. The only way to know is to do it and check to numbers. Everything else is speculation.

I'm tired of going round and round with this part of the conversation as well. Which brings me back to my original point which nobody has given a good answer to yet:

 

What benefit does hiding your find count give?

 

Yes, I've dismissed the privacy fallacy and "making a statement" reasons as grasping at straws.

Edited July 15, 2010 by Avernar

[+Team Cotati]

If you reread what I said, I didn't say half the people would opt-out. I said IF half of them opted-out, it still wouldn't affect the competition.

I did misread but it doesn't change anything. If half did opt-out it would affect things. Having half the people in Geocaching telling you that what you like about the game is stupid wouldn't affect you?

 

And I'm not only talking about the numbers competition. What would it look like to outsiders looking in to see what Geocaching is about? Having half the members pretending to be elitist and not participate looks pretty bad.

 

But you don't have to agree to disagree on that. You can continue to voice your opinion, but I'm not going to go round and round with it. The only way to know is to do it and check to numbers. Everything else is speculation.

I'm tired of going round and round with this part of the conversation as well. Which brings me back to my original point which nobody has given a good answer to yet:

 

What benefit does hiding your find count give?

 

Yes, I've dismissed the privacy fallacy and "making a statement" reasons as grasping at straws.

 

"What benefit does hiding your find count give?"

 

It let's those with find count envy maintain a modicum of self-respect and dignity when interacting with other geocachers, their girl friends, wives, family and work associates.

[+thedeadpirate]

If you reread what I said, I didn't say half the people would opt-out. I said IF half of them opted-out, it still wouldn't affect the competition.

I did misread but it doesn't change anything. If half did opt-out it would affect things. Having half the people in Geocaching telling you that what you like about the game is stupid wouldn't affect you?

Come on. Don't change directions now. It's disappointing that you would switch to a pity stance.

 

Your argument was that it would affect the competitive game if just a handful of cachers opted-out.

 

I say even half could opt-out and the numbers people could still have their competition. Are you conceding that or do you still disagree with me?

 

And I'm not only talking about the numbers competition. What would it look like to outsiders looking in to see what Geocaching is about? Having half the members pretending to be elitist and not participate looks pretty bad.

I can't believe you would bring up the elitist argument. The numbers elitism is one reason for hiding the find counts. People look down on others because they haven't found a sufficient number of caches to be taken seriously.

 

What benefit does hiding your find count give?

You've been given a number of reasons. You just don't see them as valid reasons. Others do. You don't appear to be willing to understand that there are just some things we're going to disagree on. We're not going to change your mind. As far as you're concerned, we need to get over it.

 

I'm not sure what else can be said.

[AZcachemeister]

The best option is to just not worry about how others perceive you (find count, hair style, clothing choices, the vehicle you drive, what neighborhood you live in, how you voted in the last election....), be yourself and be happy!

 

It's not about how others perceive me wrt my find count. (What's important to me is how we are perceived with regards to our hides - whether our hides get good feedback and people consider them quality caches.) Perception wrt to my find count doesn't effect me one bit....never even considered it.

 

It's about geocaching becoming more and more about the numbers. How often do you see someone put out an LPC and in the description actually say that they placed it so that people could get a smiley. More and more hiders seem to think that the point of geocaching is to get a smiley. We need to de-emphasize smiley counts.

 

If your cache is crap, I will perceive it as such wort your find count.

Conversely, if your cache is the best I've ever seen, I will perceive it as such wort your find count.

 

Indeed I have seen far to many cache descriptions that began:

'I noticed this blank spot on the map' or somesuch...pathetic.

 

It would be a good thing to capitalize those acronyms, so we can pick them out and analyze them for content.

[+Team Smokey]

If your number of forum posts is greater than your find count, you're spending too much time indoors.

[+thedeadpirate]

If your number of forum posts is greater than your find count, you're spending too much time indoors.

 

Guilty as charged.

[Mr.Yuck]

The best option is to just not worry about how others perceive you (find count, hair style, clothing choices, the vehicle you drive, what neighborhood you live in, how you voted in the last election....), be yourself and be happy!

 

It's not about how others perceive me wrt my find count. (What's important to me is how we are perceived with regards to our hides - whether our hides get good feedback and people consider them quality caches.) Perception wrt to my find count doesn't effect me one bit....never even considered it.

 

It's about geocaching becoming more and more about the numbers. How often do you see someone put out an LPC and in the description actually say that they placed it so that people could get a smiley. More and more hiders seem to think that the point of geocaching is to get a smiley. We need to de-emphasize smiley counts.

 

I admit to not carefully reading every single response. I did read Pinehurst's response though.

 

I'm surprised Lone R hasn't brought up the various privacy and anonymity options available on the letterboxing site AtlasQuest.com. You can even log a find as "anonymous". For me personally, the find count is displayed, but is not a clickable link, so no one has any clue which letterboxes I've found. You may be able to hide it totally, but I'm no expert on that website.

 

But I guess what I'm saying is it has been shown you can have privacy options on a very similar website.

[+northernpenguin]

 

I'm surprised Lone R hasn't brought up the various privacy and anonymity options available on the letterboxing site AtlasQuest.com. You can even log a find as "anonymous". For me personally, the find count is displayed, but is not a clickable link, so no one has any clue which letterboxes I've found. You may be able to hide it totally, but I'm no expert on that website.

 

But I guess what I'm saying is it has been shown you can have privacy options on a very similar website.

 

I'm still waiting to find out how we have a privacy issue on a site where we are encouraged to make up our own nicknames? .... or is TheWhiteUrkel listed in the Nynex White Pages?

[CoyoteRed]

I'm still waiting to find out how we have a privacy issue on a site where we are encouraged to make up our own nicknames? .... or is TheWhiteUrkel listed in the Nynex White Pages?

 

There's a serious privacy issue if you think it's creepy that folks use a website to monitor your hobby activities and you ever want to go to an event.

[+Team Cotati]

I'm still waiting to find out how we have a privacy issue on a site where we are encouraged to make up our own nicknames? .... or is TheWhiteUrkel listed in the Nynex White Pages?

 

There's a serious privacy issue if you think it's creepy that folks use a website to monitor your hobby activities and you ever want to go to an event.

 

Wow! That really is creepy.

 

We even went to an event once. Never gonna make THAT mistake again.

 

Thanks.

Edited July 16, 2010 by Team Cotati

[+northernpenguin]

I'm still waiting to find out how we have a privacy issue on a site where we are encouraged to make up our own nicknames? .... or is TheWhiteUrkel listed in the Nynex White Pages?

 

There's a serious privacy issue if you think it's creepy that folks use a website to monitor your hobby activities and you ever want to go to an event.

 

So what stops you from using a different, made up account for events?

We're not required to show government issued photo id to log a cache. If you have serious privacy issues, you already have the tools to mitigate those. If you choose to link your geocaching handle to your likeness (name, photo or person in the flesh), that was your decision to do that - which waters down the privacy issue pretty quick.

 

I'm pretty darned sure we aren't going to see a major identity theft case based on someone's geocaching logs.

[+Avernar]

Come on. Don't change directions now. It's disappointing that you would switch to a pity stance.

 

Your argument was that it would affect the competitive game if just a handful of cachers opted-out.

 

I say even half could opt-out and the numbers people could still have their competition. Are you conceding that or do you still disagree with me?

I'm not changing directions. And it's not a pity stance. If there's no good reason to hide the counts then the discussion about whether it will hurt Geocaching or not is moot. This is a side argument debate.

 

Yes, the numbers people could still have their competition but it would seriously reduce how fun it is. Hurting one group of cachers just for the pity reasons given for hiding the find count is not worth it.

 

And the argument was that it will hurt the Geocaching game, not just the numbers game.

 

I can't believe you would bring up the elitist argument. The numbers elitism is one reason for hiding the find counts. People look down on others because they haven't found a sufficient number of caches to be taken seriously.

A small percentage of the numbers people are elitist. A large percentage of the hide the count people are elitist.

 

And so what if someone looks down at you if your numbers are lower? How to deal with that kind of situation should have been learned in grade school.

 

You've been given a number of reasons. You just don't see them as valid reasons. Others do. You don't appear to be willing to understand that there are just some things we're going to disagree on. We're not going to change your mind. As far as you're concerned, we need to get over it.

I've been given two reason. The "make a statement" has always been bunk and always will be bunk for this or any other cause.

 

The second reason might have a tiny chance of being valid. I've asked for a clarification and haven't gotten one. How does hiding your find count affect your privacy? Nobody has given a convincing reply.

 

I'm not sure what else can be said.

Give me a convincing reason why the find count should be hidden. I'm not being stubborn. I really want to hear it.

[+Avernar]

There's a serious privacy issue if you think it's creepy that folks use a website to monitor your hobby activities and you ever want to go to an event.

That's not a privacy issue, it's paranoia.

 

The nature of the game is that it's a public and social game where people share their past experiences. So someone looking at others past activity is considered normal and even encouraged.

 

Now if you made a list of caches you were planning on visiting in the future and someone started trying to intercept you, that would be cause for real concern.

 

And as northernpenguin mentioned, there's a very easy solution for events if you feel insecure. Use another account name for them.

[+thedeadpirate]

A small percentage of the numbers people are elitist. A large percentage of the hide the count people are elitist.

 

And so what if someone looks down at you if your numbers are lower? How to deal with that kind of situation should have been learned in grade school.

So, you admit to the elitism and looking down at others because of their find count, but you still don't think it's a valid reason for hiding the count?

[+Avernar]

So, you admit to the elitism and looking down at others because of their find count, but you still don't think it's a valid reason for hiding the count?

What's there to admit to? It happens. It's a fact. There are a small number of bad apples that are super competitive to a point of being annoying.

 

And yes, it's not a valid reason. For one it won't solve the problem. Those people will just check your profile and figure it out for themselves. And second, why punish all the people who are not elitist? Especially since ignoring the elitists is the easier and better solution.

 

If nobody pays attention they'll just go away. If you start hiding your count it will just reinforce what they've been thinking. They're better than you. They've beaten you to the point where you've admitted defeat. Now they'll go aggravate the people who don't hide their count with a reinforced vigor.

 

What's the difference between "I'm better than GeoBain because I've got more finds" or "GeoBain is a looser, he's too scared to show his find count."? Neither defeats the elitism.

[+thedeadpirate]

What's the difference between "I'm better than GeoBain because I've got more finds" or "GeoBain is a looser, he's too scared to show his find count."? Neither defeats the elitism.

 

BUT THEY'RE BOTH TRUE!!!!

[+Mike & Jess]

I kind of like seeing the count. It allows me to assign a bit of experience level to the cacher and helps me to interpret comments in thier log(s).

 

For example, if a cacher with 3000 finds says my cache is missing, I give it more credence than a cacher with 17 finds saying the same thing.

 

I know it doesn't say much - but I still find it important.

 

Your post describes exactly my opinion of the numbers game.

 

As of right now, I have ~185 finds. Compare my count to those 1000+ guys, and I am a newbie (numbers only).

What my numbers don't tell you is;

1. outside of the few urban caches, most caches in this town are 3/3 or greater, requiring some some off-road travel

2. ~200 caches available within 30km radius

3. Most of my finds are done via mountain bike, hiking boots, or kayak

4. Been caching for ~3 years

5. Done a couple caches in a few different states and provinces

6. I've a geocahing/Groundspeak retailer

7. The nearest power trail is ~400km from here.

8. Hosted, Co-hosted or a vendor and a number of GC events

In short, my numbers to any local geocacher indicates I have been around. To most on here, when comparing to the 1000+ guys, I am a third year newbie.

 

Using these numbers to judge experience is not a great idea. Take these numbers, and the comments posted on that DNF may be a better idea.

Even at that, if I have a DNF by a newbie, in many cases (if time permits), I'll offer to meet up with them and go visit the cache together. They'll get the find, I get a cache maintainance, and respect is earned all around.