Jump to content

Limiting new cache creation rights to cachers with more than 100 finds


binaryflow

Recommended Posts

so what about people who aren't maintaining their caches? I've emailed an owner twice after 2 DNFs on his cache with no response. really bugs me. I'm not the only DNF recently, just THE most recent. I'm new & all but I'm thinking he should either check it or archive it. verdict?

:mellow:

I must have misheard - I thought you said there had been 2 DNFs and you've emailed the owner twice & want him to check or archive. Must get my hearing checked. :)

 

yes...if he's not going to give advice or at least RESPOND politely. I took the time to research, to look, to look again & even to clean up some of the trash the CO obviously ignored when he placed the cache (it's in a notorious dump spot) and last checked the cache (when it was having camo issues). he was within a mile or so of the cache within weeks of the second DNF. did he check on it? if he did, post a log telling the DNFs they were off & it's still there. how else will we learn? I know where he was because I did my research. I looked up where HE'S been looking/logging, and it happened to be my first find just down the SAME road from his.

 

cacher stalker? maybe. more interested in logging own finds than maintaining owns? maybe. :laughing:

Link to comment

I think people on these forums spend more time worrying what other people are doing and fretting over stuff than any other hobby forum I've ever seen. A poorly researched cache will suck no matter what. 1,000 finds won't change this. People should just have fun and take part in the game.

 

I spent several months planning my hides. They aren't perfect, but I would argue they are better than the hides I have seen by a few more experienced cachers... but thats the thing: Different people like different caches.

I love urban micros for example. I haven't hidden one yet, but I would like too.

I'm sure it will annoy some people that it exists, but I don't like fake turds and wasp nests so what can you do?

Link to comment

so what about people who aren't maintaining their caches? I've emailed an owner twice after 2 DNFs on his cache with no response. really bugs me. I'm not the only DNF recently, just THE most recent. I'm new & all but I'm thinking he should either check it or archive it. verdict?

:mellow:

I must have misheard - I thought you said there had been 2 DNFs and you've emailed the owner twice & want him to check or archive. Must get my hearing checked. :)

 

yes...if he's not going to give advice or at least RESPOND politely. I took the time to research, to look, to look again & even to clean up some of the trash the CO obviously ignored when he placed the cache (it's in a notorious dump spot) and last checked the cache (when it was having camo issues). he was within a mile or so of the cache within weeks of the second DNF. did he check on it? if he did, post a log telling the DNFs they were off & it's still there. how else will we learn? I know where he was because I did my research. I looked up where HE'S been looking/logging, and it happened to be my first find just down the SAME road from his.

 

cacher stalker? maybe. more interested in logging own finds than maintaining owns? maybe. :laughing:

 

Official word goes something like this...

 

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically, and especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.). You may temporarily disable your cache to let others know not to hunt for it until you have a chance to fix the problem. This feature is to allow you a reasonable time – normally a few weeks – in which to arrange a visit to your cache. In the event that a cache is not being properly maintained, or has been temporarily disabled for an extended period of time, we may archive the listing.

 

...and it's all I could ask for. :laughing:

Link to comment

 

What I think instead is a good solution, is to step up the amount of Geocaching 101 events, and group caching education trips, so then new folks can *decide* if they want to learn more about placing quality hides, rather than be *forced* to find 100 caches (which honestly, if those 100 finds are all LPCs... how would that mean anything?) first.

 

 

I like this solution quite a bit... I probably would have attended such an event when I first started (and probably still would, since I've only been caching for a few months). Educating new cachers rather than putting restrictions on them seems like a feasible way not only to improve hide quality, but also to promote CITO and responsible caching (i.e. not destroying the area around a cache to make the find, or not hunting at night for a cache that is listed as being available only from dawn to dusk).

 

Exactly! Plus you get to know other cachers in your community and make friends.

Link to comment

...and it's all I could ask for. :)

Thing is, and it depends on the circumstances (difficulty of hide etc), I wouldn't necessarily see 2 DNFs as meaning there is a problem.

Depends on the wording of the DNF logs I guess.

 

I had 2 DNFs in a row (might have been 3) on one of our caches but it was fine. I did however give the last DNFer a further hint and he went back next day and found it. If I hadn't it would have been sitting there perfectly happy with 2 or 3 DNFs on it.

 

As a cacher I watch caches I couldn't find (on the watch list) and see what happens. After a few weeks they either accumulate a few more DNFs and the CO goes and takes a look, or they are found soon after and i'll go back and have another go.

No point sitting worrying about it, and if the CO is not one to respond to emails then all you can do is watch, and wait :mellow:

Link to comment

What a truly terrible idea :mellow:

 

Unlike everywhere else across the internet where there are about a trillion different websites for hobbies and pastimes; geocaching has a one stop shop. I really like that fact but if there are going to be silly rules that discourage instead of encourage I can see division within the ranks.

 

Why tar all newbies with the idiot brush?? If you find 100 caches do you automatically reach enlightenment for hiding the perfect cache? Doubtful. You could find 10,000 caches and still put out terrible caches or find 1 caches and place 10 of the best caches known to man or woman :)

 

I really don't think we should be adding barriers to geocaching. After about 15 finds I felt ready to hide my first. However, most of my first finds were hid by experienced cachers so I got a good feel of what way I wanted to go. I think I finally got 'round to placing my first around the 50 mark, so far I think it's been a success :laughing:

 

It's difficult to measure how much or how little experience someone needs to place a good cache and who will police this? Geocaching is a community very much run by the community. If we didn't all do our bit it would disappear overnight. Clearly Geocaching.com / Groundspeak do a great job of keeping it altogether and organised but are they expected to police bad cachers??

 

The only way to improve poor caching is with honest feedback. TFTC is no good when you really mean 'Thanks for sending me in totally the wrong direction only to finally find your cache soaked through because you're so cheap. BTW why did you bring me to this awful industrial estate?'

Link to comment

The only way to improve poor caching is with honest feedback. TFTC is no good when you really mean 'Thanks for sending me in totally the wrong direction only to finally find your cache soaked through because you're so cheap. BTW why did you bring me to this awful industrial estate?'

 

I agree. This is the best method we currently have to deal with poor cache placements - honesty in the logs instead of TFTC or not logging the cache at all.

Link to comment

If you think a new geocacher can't hide or maintain a cache correctly you have the option to ignore his/her geocaches. But IMHO Going out and finding geocaches doesn't make you an expert at concealing a cache either.

 

Right now you have the option to.

 

1. Ignore caches you don't want to goto due to location or type.

2. Ignore caches that have an OP with low figures.

3. Check cache notes to see what others say about the noobs cache.

4. Leave feedback for other cachers aswell as the OP if the cache needs work.

 

Restrict cache creations will just

 

1. Limit the caches around you.

2. Put people off geocaching.

3. Penalize people who don't have a chance to find caches due to Personal, Family or Professional commitments. Also don't forget disability or dependency is a big issue aswell.

4. This will also Remove your freedom of choice aswell.

 

Many people make good arguments for both sides. Remember though that nobody is making you goto the new caches. It would take you no time to figure out if this cache is worth your effort or not. Just look at the site.

 

As for the Policy change. Just ask this simple question. who would this policy effected most and how would they feel.

Edited by Claudis192
Link to comment

had to jump in on this one...

i'm new, have only found 12 (two night caches only hours ago), but we are excitedly getting ready to hide our first cache. we discussed amongst ourselves if we (schongauer, my partner) are ready... i think we are more than prepared to tactfully and responsibly hide a cache to the difficulty that we can match in finding them. we are both artists who find immense inspiration in geocaching, and it would be difficult for us to throw out ideas until 100 finds. thankfully, schongauer was a boyscout, with keen senses and the know how with coordinates, and we are already putting in our creativity for the cache we are yet to place... but i am worried we will be found unworthy of this privilege in the geocaching community. i understand where the point is made, but i'd suggest newcomers are guided to hide as they are able to find, at the same skill level. hiding can be as educational, i expect, for us rookies.

i actually thought we might regulate our caches such as for every x number of caches found (say 15 or 20) we would find reward in the hiding of a cache. this has been our personal take on the matter, and i hope that can say something to our understanding of geocaching and the community of geocachers as a whole.

Link to comment

Lots of wisdom in your post. One thing I'd like to touch on is this line:

 

...but i am worried we will be found unworthy of this privilege in the geocaching community...

 

Something you'll discover after you've been to a few events and schmoozed with some other cachers;

The real geocaching world is nothing like what is represented in the forums.

Out of over one million active geocaching accounts, there are maybe 30 people who are forum regulars.

I guarantee your hides will not only be found worthy, they will be thoroughly enjoyed.

Have fun! Don't sweat the forum jabber. :huh:

Link to comment

had to jump in on this one...

i'm new, have only found 12 (two night caches only hours ago), but we are excitedly getting ready to hide our first cache. we discussed amongst ourselves if we (schongauer, my partner) are ready... i think we are more than prepared to tactfully and responsibly hide a cache to the difficulty that we can match in finding them. we are both artists who find immense inspiration in geocaching, and it would be difficult for us to throw out ideas until 100 finds. thankfully, schongauer was a boyscout, with keen senses and the know how with coordinates, and we are already putting in our creativity for the cache we are yet to place... but i am worried we will be found unworthy of this privilege in the geocaching community. i understand where the point is made, but i'd suggest newcomers are guided to hide as they are able to find, at the same skill level. hiding can be as educational, i expect, for us rookies.

i actually thought we might regulate our caches such as for every x number of caches found (say 15 or 20) we would find reward in the hiding of a cache. this has been our personal take on the matter, and i hope that can say something to our understanding of geocaching and the community of geocachers as a whole.

 

Please, don't set yourself some silly ratio of hides to finds. Hide when the the muse strikes. If you start hiding a cache because you feel you have to, even if that is do to a self imposed requirement, you will find yourself hiding caches that aren't up to your own personal best or standards.

 

And I'm glad to hear you are enjoying our little bit of insanity.

Link to comment

I've heard tell of a road out there somewhere that is paved with good intentions.

 

Much like this idea.

 

It sounds good, and would be nice if it were true. But it fails on the assumption that all people are equal and that experience in finding caches necessarily translates into anything.

 

A little experience is helpful, but a little excitement, enthusiasm, and imagination is better.

 

In other words, I think the 'quality' of a cache is more about the effort invested in creating it than anything else.

Link to comment

had to jump in on this one...

i'm new, have only found 12 (two night caches only hours ago), but we are excitedly getting ready to hide our first cache. we discussed amongst ourselves if we (schongauer, my partner) are ready...but i am worried we will be found unworthy of this privilege in the geocaching community.

 

Sounds like you are keen to provide finders with a good caching experience. You will probably please the majority of geocachers if you plant a sturdy water tight container, large enough to hold travelbugs and swag, place it in an interesting setting (scenic, historic, a nice walk in the woods, a pleasant park, etc.), accurate coordinates, a useful hint and be ready to maintain both the cache page and the physical cache in a timely fashion.

Link to comment

The only way to improve poor caching is with honest feedback. TFTC is no good when you really mean 'Thanks for sending me in totally the wrong direction only to finally find your cache soaked through because you're so cheap. BTW why did you bring me to this awful industrial estate?'

 

I agree. This is the best method we currently have to deal with poor cache placements - honesty in the logs instead of TFTC or not logging the cache at all.

 

+1

 

I also thought of another scenario where this rule would not work... there are many people in the world who live in areas where finding 100 caches just isn't really possible due to low cache density. How would the density ever increase if no one could find enough caches to hide any?

Link to comment

I also thought of another scenario where this rule would not work... there are many people in the world who live in areas where finding 100 caches just isn't really possible due to low cache density. How would the density ever increase if no one could find enough caches to hide any?

 

First HI Roz... But I agree... even though I haven't tried to hide yet, I would easily come under that low category... I have to travel large distances to find large numbers of caches... I have a few new ones created in the last few weeks, but not many in walking distance... I did get a few FTFs though... One was a decoy... new cache placed so that I was off to FTF, then placer took off by vehicle to get the other 4 or 5... nah!

 

Anyway back on topic... I don't think count has much to do with it... it is a nice idea to get some experience though... As one path available to all... How about an online course of instruction available through either GC or perhaps thru regional groups... you know what I mean... I recently did a WHMIS that way... you follow the instruction material, and answer test questions, then you go forward to the next material... and so on, until your test scores a pass... Would it catch everything, NO... but if it required a high average, you couldn't avoid at least reading the basic material... and guidelines... at that point you would be enabled to create a cache... This doesn't have to be tough in order to exclude people, just firm and consistent to verify a basic understanding.

 

After all, some pretty good hides have come from some who have no experience at all, even NO finds.

It would just be some education and confirmation that you understood what you read...

 

Anyway it was just an idea, but we all have computers don't we... whats a few minutes... I can hear the howls already if it was made Retroactive... (ducking fast) The idea would be good for things like Trackables as well, but maybe without the enabling part... but I'm not sure about that either... when I think about some gaffs that get made... placing without activating etc.

 

Doug 7rxc

Link to comment

I've been giving a lot of thought to issues related to caches put out by brand new cachers. There can be (obviously not always) problems with coordinates being wrong, containers being the wrong size and the terrain/difficulty numbers being way too high. I've proposed an idea to several of my caching friends that Groundspeak consider limiting the ability to hide new caches to cachers that have found more than 100 hides. Since they have universally said they thought it was a good idea I thought I would bring it up here. This is in no means a slap at brand new cachers. I just think we need to afford them the time to familiarize themselves with different hide styles, containers and various terrain/difficulty numbers before putting out new caches. I'm sure there are exceptions to every rule and this is just my opinion based on my experiences in the field. As as more experienced cacher I have made my fair share of mistakes when posting new caches. I do wonder though what kind of affect this would have on the game. Perhaps the 100 cache milestone (or some other arbitrary number) shows a dedication to the game that would ensure long term cache maintenance? Thoughts?

Not a good idea. I guess I would be the exception. I just reached 100 finds yesterday. Yet I have 16 caches that are some of the best in my area. When I set cords. I average at least 2 minutes down to at least 9ft. Most of my ideas didn't come from the 100 finds. Some did.

Link to comment

so what about people who aren't maintaining their caches? I've emailed an owner twice after 2 DNFs on his cache with no response. really bugs me. I'm not the only DNF recently, just THE most recent. I'm new & all but I'm thinking he should either check it or archive it. verdict?

:P

I must have misheard - I thought you said there had been 2 DNFs and you've emailed the owner twice & want him to check or archive. Must get my hearing checked. :huh:

 

yes...if he's not going to give advice or at least RESPOND politely. I took the time to research, to look, to look again & even to clean up some of the trash the CO obviously ignored when he placed the cache (it's in a notorious dump spot) and last checked the cache (when it was having camo issues). he was within a mile or so of the cache within weeks of the second DNF. did he check on it? if he did, post a log telling the DNFs they were off & it's still there. how else will we learn? I know where he was because I did my research. I looked up where HE'S been looking/logging, and it happened to be my first find just down the SAME road from his.

 

cacher stalker? maybe. more interested in logging own finds than maintaining owns? maybe. :)

 

Cache Stalker? I like that. I guess to a certain degree, it describes me.

There is supposed to be a cache Velcroed under a bus bench about a .75 mile from my home. I found it shortly after it was published. A few years later the DNFs started so I figured I would do the owner a favor and check. Sure enough, it was gone. I posted a note, making it clear that I was a previous finder and all that was there was a strip of Velcro. No response. Instead, the guy shows up a month later and does a 75 cache power run of the area. It looks like he had to have drove past his strip of Velcro at least three times. Did he have time to stop? No. Does he have time to post an Archive log? No.

 

The cacher has a couple thousand finds and a couple hundred hides. Experienced cacher does not always equal responsible cacher.

 

I can't think of any way to use a ratio or limit system that would be fair to anyone. The only thing that really works is the Neighborhood Watch approach. As a responsible cacher, I guess I'll start the process on this one. Off to post the NA. (He's known of the problem for ten months)

Link to comment

had to jump in on this one...

i'm new, have only found 12 (two night caches only hours ago), but we are excitedly getting ready to hide our first cache. we discussed amongst ourselves if we (schongauer, my partner) are ready... i think we are more than prepared to tactfully and responsibly hide a cache to the difficulty that we can match in finding them. we are both artists who find immense inspiration in geocaching, and it would be difficult for us to throw out ideas until 100 finds. thankfully, schongauer was a boyscout, with keen senses and the know how with coordinates, and we are already putting in our creativity for the cache we are yet to place... but i am worried we will be found unworthy of this privilege in the geocaching community. i understand where the point is made, but i'd suggest newcomers are guided to hide as they are able to find, at the same skill level. hiding can be as educational, i expect, for us rookies.

i actually thought we might regulate our caches such as for every x number of caches found (say 15 or 20) we would find reward in the hiding of a cache. this has been our personal take on the matter, and i hope that can say something to our understanding of geocaching and the community of geocachers as a whole.

 

Please, don't set yourself some silly ratio of hides to finds. Hide when the the muse strikes. If you start hiding a cache because you feel you have to, even if that is do to a self imposed requirement, you will find yourself hiding caches that aren't up to your own personal best or standards.

 

And I'm glad to hear you are enjoying our little bit of insanity.

 

I totally agree with this. I hike with various different sized and shaped containers in my backpack. If I stumble upon a spot and I "feel it", my pack will probably lighten up a bit. I have passed over spots because I didn't "feel it", only to have some guy drop a lock n lock on the ground and cover it with rocks, a week later. I'll go back and get my smiley because I know in a month, the DNFs are going to start.

Link to comment

I guess the biggest flaw with this idea.

 

If I drive 10 miles on the E.T. Highway, I will be qualified to hide a cache. Of course, all I'll know about caching is that you are supposed to stick a film can at the base of a highway deliminator post and stick a rock on top of it.

:huh:

Link to comment

This has been discussed to death in the forums. I haven't read the thread, but I can sum it up:

 

People with fewer than 100 finds sometimes release bad caches, whether it be bad coordinates, no permission when permission is needed, boring area, etc. However people with many more finds can also hide bad caches of this nature.

On the other side of the coin, people with fewer than 100 finds can hide some really great geocaches, as can people with more than that.

 

Just remember, the first person to hide a geocache had found zero, and look how many caches that one inspired - millions!

Link to comment

Some people really hate failed caches hidden by new, inexperienced hiders. Check out the needs archived log on this cache. Too Much Snow! :yikes:

 

I think we're going to see more and more of these fed-up types of logs. I've seen at least a couple in my area. What else is there to do about the problem?

 

It sends a strong message to new COs that they need to be responsible for their hides in a timely fashion as outlined by the guidelines. The reviewers could help decrease the fed-up syndrome if they watched newbie hides for the first few logs to see if everything is OK. If not, a quick disable, followed by an archive if necessary, would help diffuse the angst.

Link to comment

even as a new geocacher, i wouldn't find it incredulous if there were a requirement, but 100 is steep. that would probably take a year for us to accomplish, even as we spend 8-10 hours on the hunt. i can sense that it's a topic that will be around again and again. i encourage experienced cachers to avoid harping. we all have to start somewhere. for the most part, we enjoy the time we get to spend together, and i hope it doesn't come to just the numbers or entitlement... of course, we will continue enjoying geocaching in our own unique way, hoping to bring something new and interesting to our community :yikes:

Link to comment

Some people really hate failed caches hidden by new, inexperienced hiders. Check out the needs archived log on this cache. Too Much Snow! :yikes:

 

Wow. Some one needs to calm down. Too much something. I understand his frustration, but that's a little overboard especially on a Boy Scout cache

 

even as a new geocacher, i wouldn't find it incredulous if there were a requirement, but 100 is steep. that would probably take a year for us to accomplish, even as we spend 8-10 hours on the hunt. i can sense that it's a topic that will be around again and again. i encourage experienced cachers to avoid harping. we all have to start somewhere. for the most part, we enjoy the time we get to spend together, and i hope it doesn't come to just the numbers or entitlement... of course, we will continue enjoying geocaching in our own unique way, hoping to bring something new and interesting to our community :sad:

 

It sounds like yall understand the point of Geocaching better than some. I agree that 100 is steep (we have to realize that in some places there are no caches). Even if the requirement was something like 10 finds it may help. But I'm not going to loose sleep over it.

Link to comment

Some people really hate failed caches hidden by new, inexperienced hiders. Check out the needs archived log on this cache. Too Much Snow! :yikes:

 

I am not going to say what I think here as I don't want to get banned.

Allow me...

 

A new cacher hid a cache, in a seemingly lovely environment, choosing a regular size container.

A grand total of one cacher hunted for it, posting a DNF.

A high numbers cacher who is way too full of himself used this one DNF to justify a ranting SBA.

The high numbers ranter didn't even bother searching for the cache himself.

Groundspeak caved in to the ranting cacher, archiving the cache.

Link to comment

Some people really hate failed caches hidden by new, inexperienced hiders. Check out the needs archived log on this cache. Too Much Snow! :yikes:

 

Wow. Some one needs to calm down. Too much something. I understand his frustration, but that's a little overboard especially on a Boy Scout cache

 

even as a new geocacher, i wouldn't find it incredulous if there were a requirement, but 100 is steep. that would probably take a year for us to accomplish, even as we spend 8-10 hours on the hunt. i can sense that it's a topic that will be around again and again. i encourage experienced cachers to avoid harping. we all have to start somewhere. for the most part, we enjoy the time we get to spend together, and i hope it doesn't come to just the numbers or entitlement... of course, we will continue enjoying geocaching in our own unique way, hoping to bring something new and interesting to our community :sad:

 

It sounds like yall understand the point of Geocaching better than some. I agree that 100 is steep (we have to realize that in some places there are no caches). Even if the requirement was something like 10 finds it may help. But I'm not going to loose sleep over it.

 

I have had to drive some distance this caching season to get over 100 caches because there are darn few around me. I had a great mentor in the geocaching world locally and that mentor has probably taught me more than any of the caches I have found. If people have a huge problem with how the new folks are hiding the caches... mentor them. Take some initiative and send an e-mail. I haven't put out any hides yet because getting permission was very important to me as well as the reality that I recognize I just odn't have a lot of time to maintain a lot of caches frequently. And now winter is basically almost here. Even in the caches I have found there has been lots of redundancy asking someone to find 100 may mean they learn how to stick a pill bottle in a pine tree and call it good. It doesn't mean they will find a great variety of hides or even quality hides at that.

 

I thought one of the anticipated problems with boyscouts having the badge for geocaching was the reality that the kids would be placing caches out in the wild which may go unmaintained. I looked at the placer of the cache and thought about the troops here who are much much less active in the summer than during the school year and wondered if that was part of the reality of that troop.

 

I don't know. I've seen many unmaintained bad caches by people with a couple thousand finds. Some great ones by people with few finds and vice versa. I agree it's about the effort put in. Too many factors go into people's finds (time, money, available caches, desire to do hard ones versus park and grabs etc.) to really say they're any more or less qualified than anyone else.

 

If people have a huge problem with newbie caches then check to see when it was hidden and the experience of the cacher before rushing out to something that may lead to disappointment. I'm able to see from the logs usually if the cache is being maintained and how well. I skip those that are a hot mess. Simple as that.

Link to comment

I have 14 finds myself so am most certainly a n00b, and if a rule like this were in place when I joined, I probably wouldn't have bothered starting the hobby in the first place. There's nothing more off-putting for a newcomer to an activity than to feel they're less worthy than others because of hierarchical rules.

 

Plus, this is supposed to be about fun. Even if a cache placement is bad, stupid, wrong, boring, etc., the cache placer may be excited about his first hide or find. LPCs, for example, are much maligned, but they're among the first caches I found and made me feel I accomplished something. They kept me wanting more <ducking to avoid lampskirts thrown in my direction :sad: > I didn't know that I was caching incorrectly--I was just enjoying myself :laughing:

 

Rules that restrict the game and favor longtime players will make this a clique sport, though I'm sure that how some folks might like it. I've seen it in other hobbies, like toy camera photography--some people are viewed as less worthy because they buy certain cameras. For me, I just want to have a good time. If geocaching is making you angry, re-think the hobby.

 

This is very much a self-governing community and should stay that way--if you find a cache that is in need of attention, report it as such and let it go. Or even better, do a little maintenance yourself and take joy in that you're improving the experience in a positive manner. :yikes:

Link to comment

Some people really hate failed caches hidden by new, inexperienced hiders. Check out the needs archived log on this cache. Too Much Snow! :yikes:

 

I am not going to say what I think here as I don't want to get banned.

Allow me...

 

A new cacher hid a cache, in a seemingly lovely environment, choosing a regular size container.

A grand total of one cacher hunted for it, posting a DNF.

A high numbers cacher who is way too full of himself used this one DNF to justify a ranting SBA.

The high numbers ranter didn't even bother searching for the cache himself.

Groundspeak caved in to the ranting cacher, archiving the cache.

 

You missed the bit where the cache owner didn't trust their own coordinates and disabled their own cache for 2.5 months. However I agree that the response from the seasoned geocacher was over the top. He makes it sound as though he has suffered some kind of personal injury from this placement.

Link to comment

Some people really hate failed caches hidden by new, inexperienced hiders. Check out the needs archived log on this cache. Too Much Snow! :yikes:

 

I am not going to say what I think here as I don't want to get banned.

Allow me...

 

A new cacher hid a cache, in a seemingly lovely environment, choosing a regular size container.

A grand total of one cacher hunted for it, posting a DNF.

A high numbers cacher who is way too full of himself used this one DNF to justify a ranting SBA.

The high numbers ranter didn't even bother searching for the cache himself.

Groundspeak caved in to the ranting cacher, archiving the cache.

Only the cache hasn't been archived. It was disabled by the cache owner when he saw the coordinates have a problem. It appears to be where the scouts took their alternative hike and not where the had encountered too much snow. (Which reminds me - I need to add a winter-no.gif attribute to my cache). After being disabled for three months the high numbers cache posted a Needs Archive log. He may come across as too judgmental in attacking the scouts for not doing maintenance on his schedule. Quite frankly I sure the reviewers know his reputation and probably take that into consideration. But if the scouts aren't going to maintain their cache then maybe it should be archived. Now I might suggest that someone look on the Mt. Baden Powell trail below my cache for a suspicious pile of tree branches that might cover an ammo box and get a FTF and corrected coordinates. That would be really cool. In fact, I going to add this one to my watch list and even it it gets archived, I might look for it the next time I go up there and claim bragging rights.

Link to comment

Some people really hate failed caches hidden by new, inexperienced hiders. Check out the needs archived log on this cache. Too Much Snow! :yikes:

 

I am not going to say what I think here as I don't want to get banned.

Allow me...

 

A new cacher hid a cache, in a seemingly lovely environment, choosing a regular size container.

A grand total of one cacher hunted for it, posting a DNF.

A high numbers cacher who is way too full of himself used this one DNF to justify a ranting SBA.

The high numbers ranter didn't even bother searching for the cache himself.

Groundspeak caved in to the ranting cacher, archiving the cache.

Only the cache hasn't been archived. It was disabled by the cache owner when he saw the coordinates have a problem. It appears to be where the scouts took their alternative hike and not where the had encountered too much snow. (Which reminds me - I need to add a winter-no.gif attribute to my cache). After being disabled for three months the high numbers cache posted a Needs Archive log. He may come across as too judgmental in attacking the scouts for not doing maintenance on his schedule. Quite frankly I sure the reviewers know his reputation and probably take that into consideration. But if the scouts aren't going to maintain their cache then maybe it should be archived. Now I might suggest that someone look on the Mt. Baden Powell trail below my cache for a suspicious pile of tree branches that might cover an ammo box and get a FTF and corrected coordinates. That would be really cool. In fact, I going to add this one to my watch list and even it it gets archived, I might look for it the next time I go up there and claim bragging rights.

 

Did the hiders make a mistake? Yes. But the response was ridiculous. Perhaps instead of acting like a horses backside the the high numbers cacher could have offered some of his expertise to help the scouts do a better job. And that is about as nice as I can put it.

Link to comment

a bit off the thread of this but a way of helping with the op's points ( or at lest the theme of them ) and points raised in the topic there seems to me to been a need for both more reviewers to sort out both new caches and old one that need a bit of tlc. I have looked there Is no information on how to become a reviewer.

 

also I spotted the fact that for new peeps to the game there is a bit on the forums for them to ask things but some times as a new cacher I wish there was some on in the local area that I could turn to to do a few trips with to “ show me the ropes” of both finding and hiding the caches that are around the local area.

 

though the buddies and reviewers do not need to be the same people it mite help to drop the number of caches that get lost/abandon or archived in the first few weeks/mouths of being published (all the groups in my area seem to be dead ) I think some sort of goundspeak buddies program would fill the hole were there are no local groups or they are inactive

Link to comment

Some people really hate failed caches hidden by new, inexperienced hiders. Check out the needs archived log on this cache. Too Much Snow! :yikes:

 

I am not going to say what I think here as I don't want to get banned.

Allow me...

 

A new cacher hid a cache, in a seemingly lovely environment, choosing a regular size container.

A grand total of one cacher hunted for it, posting a DNF.

A high numbers cacher who is way too full of himself used this one DNF to justify a ranting SBA.

The high numbers ranter didn't even bother searching for the cache himself.

Groundspeak caved in to the ranting cacher, archiving the cache.

Only the cache hasn't been archived. It was disabled by the cache owner when he saw the coordinates have a problem. It appears to be where the scouts took their alternative hike and not where the had encountered too much snow. (Which reminds me - I need to add a winter-no.gif attribute to my cache). After being disabled for three months the high numbers cache posted a Needs Archive log. He may come across as too judgmental in attacking the scouts for not doing maintenance on his schedule. Quite frankly I sure the reviewers know his reputation and probably take that into consideration. But if the scouts aren't going to maintain their cache then maybe it should be archived. Now I might suggest that someone look on the Mt. Baden Powell trail below my cache for a suspicious pile of tree branches that might cover an ammo box and get a FTF and corrected coordinates. That would be really cool. In fact, I going to add this one to my watch list and even it it gets archived, I might look for it the next time I go up there and claim bragging rights.

 

I'm with TOZ, and GOF on this on this. Too be clear, the person that posted the NA is not a NFS employee. He is a volunteer and he has donated countless hours to the Angeles National Forest. I appreciate that, but I do not feel that this gives him the right to hold the Forest and Groundspeak hostage by making ridiculous demands.

 

The cache in question has one DNF on it. I have a cache that has been out there for three years and has two finds, (one by our villain). If some guy shows up tomorrow and can't find it, does that make me a bad person that is littering the Forest? Should I take a day and go check on it?

 

I think two things are clear.

There Is a cache out there waiting to be found.

The person in question missed a perfect opportunity to interact with the scouts that are on this mountain almost every weekend. He has a vast knowledge of the the trails, the peaks, etc, and he could be a great benefit to them. Heck, he could have stopped these scout from heading into an impassable snow field from the git go.

Link to comment
Did the hiders make a mistake? Yes.

We don't really know if the Scouts flubbed the coords. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. So far only one person has looked. Could they have missed it? Absolutely. Clever camo has thwarted the most seasoned seekers. I think the only mistake made by the hider was not having a long term plan in place prior to hiding the cache. Does that justify the outright temper tantrum that was thrown by a supposedly respected member of our community? Absolutely not.

 

This could've been handled two ways:

1 ) A quiet, polite e-mail to the Reviewer, explaining the problem, and another e-mail to the hider, offering help.

2 ) A conniption fit, replete with childish threats.

 

Why someone who has such a stellar reputation would ever pick Option # 2 is beyond me.

Link to comment

How about an online course of instruction available through either GC or perhaps thru regional groups... you know what I mean... I recently did a WHMIS that way... you follow the instruction material, and answer test questions, then you go forward to the next material... and so on, until your test scores a pass... Would it catch everything, NO... but if it required a high average, you couldn't avoid at least reading the basic material... and guidelines... at that point you would be enabled to create a cache... This doesn't have to be tough in order to exclude people, just firm and consistent to verify a basic understanding.

 

I think this might be a really fun idea, and helpful! Like a "Geocaching University" of sorts... maybe even going through this class might get you a badge for your profile or something like that. I love it.

Link to comment

[

I think this might be a really fun idea, and helpful! Like a "Geocaching University" of sorts... maybe even going through this class might get you a badge for your profile or something like that. I love it.

 

I should be a bit clearer on one point... This would be a one time event... unless maybe if one didn't really get it straight after a few 'bad' caches it might be needed for a reviewer to ask for a redo... I get a lot more concerned about things like TBs and Geocoins being misunderstood. I was trying to track one that went missing and was looking through logs on various caches and their own logs... Amazed that people post the tracking numbers so often... both in logs and in photos... and don't know how to retrieve, drop, grab and visit them...

We won't mention how to research and then find a cache... or read a GPS...

 

Got to run... don't seem to have time for avatars these days...

 

Doug 7rxc

Link to comment

This is my first post so thankfully there aren't any rules on how many minimum posts you need.

 

I have been geocaching almost two months now with 59 finds. Some of the hides in my area are very cleaver and very good and I'd like to do one myself after I've seen more.

 

I raised this same thing in a log entry not knowing it was against the "rules" not to do so.

 

Some of the reasons I suggested it are the same as what's being discussed some are different. One thing that didn't occur to me was areas that aren't target rich environments.

 

The cache is here: GC2C8NH

 

Let me know if I need to cut and paste the entries into this thread.

 

Thanks!

Link to comment

I've been giving a lot of thought to issues related to caches put out by brand new cachers. There can be (obviously not always) problems with coordinates being wrong, containers being the wrong size and the terrain/difficulty numbers being way too high. I've proposed an idea to several of my caching friends that Groundspeak consider limiting the ability to hide new caches to cachers that have found more than 100 hides. Since they have universally said they thought it was a good idea I thought I would bring it up here. This is in no means a slap at brand new cachers. I just think we need to afford them the time to familiarize themselves with different hide styles, containers and various terrain/difficulty numbers before putting out new caches. I'm sure there are exceptions to every rule and this is just my opinion based on my experiences in the field. As as more experienced cacher I have made my fair share of mistakes when posting new caches. I do wonder though what kind of affect this would have on the game. Perhaps the 100 cache milestone (or some other arbitrary number) shows a dedication to the game that would ensure long term cache maintenance? Thoughts?

 

How about you chose not to find caches placed by cachers with less than 100 finds?

Link to comment

I agree with the Dolphin. Just because you're under 100 finds doesn't mean you place terrible hides, that's too much of a stereotype. Besides, the best way for cachers to learn about good hiding techniques is to place them THEMSELVES and see what comments come up, this is probably the best way to learn something, through trial and error, not observation, because even if people with over 100 finds, they won't do any better than a 10 cache finder at hiding caches, because both of them had no experience whatsoever in hiding a cache!

I, myself, hid my first caches very recently, and even at only 17 finds, both of my caches have done very well. If you must place a limit, it must be very low, like 10, so that geocachers only need a brief introduction to the basic hiding techniques of a cache, and then hide them! Not to mention that hiding caches also HELPS you find them. If you know where you would most likely put a cache, you can find the cache more easily by searching the probable hiding spots. To back this up, there are alot of accounts of geocachers hiding a cache, only to find another cache in the same spot! This suggests that if you know were you are going to hide a geocache, it will most likely help you find a geocache, and this can only be achieved if you learn how to hide caches!

 

If this idea would be put into play, basically all of the newbies would throw a huge riot. I recommend not doing this. <_<

Link to comment

 

How about you chose not to find caches placed by cachers with less than 100 finds?

 

its not that simple, the thing is some people create sock puppet accounts for the sole purpose of placing caches so they may be an experienced cacher after all

 

while i hate putting restrictions on anyone something has to be done that would meet everyone half way

 

also some reviewers can put a bit more effort into publishing caches than just checking for proximity

 

i just run a PQ of unfound caches and right off the bat 2 stand out

 

this one from a Member Since: Monday, 13 September 2010, no finds but one hide

cache has no description and no attributes

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...26-efb9d0c541fa

 

second in line a user with 28 finds places a cache on the river accessible by boat only rated T1.5 when guidelines suggest a T5 and no attributes either

never mind they didn't bother reading the guidelines but they couldn't even consult the nearby cache to see what rating it has?

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...64-8baff5371731

Edited by t4e
Link to comment

My brother introduced his friend to geocaching and as soon as he started finding them, he wanted to hide some. My brother told me that this guy has come up with some amazing cache containers and creative hides before he even had 50 finds. A guy in my area has over 1000 finds and he's still placing crappy caches. It doesn't matter how many finds a person has. Either they are going to put effort into it or they're not.

Link to comment
binaryflow

 

Premium Member

 

Group: Premium Members

Posts: 1

Joined: 1-May 09

From: Holly Springs, NC

 

I think forum members should be required to participate in 10 threads about micros, 20 threads about bringing back virtuals, no less than 15 about "signed = found" and 23 about missing travel bugs before suggesting a change to the guidelines.

 

I mean, if we're going to throw out arbitrary numbers...

 

No need to get snarky with the OP. It was a well-reasoned, coherent suggestion. One I disagree with, but that's why people come to the forums, to DISCUSS things. Just because somebody doesn't regularly participate in the forums, doesn't mean that they aren't allowed to have opinions, and aren't allowed to express them. No wonder some people think that the forums are hostile. <_<

 

It's not a discussion if you toss the idea out your virtual window and never come back to pick it up.

 

My point that the OP is suggesting some sort of "buy in" to caching by making finds numbering "X" when the OP hasn't made a similar "buy in" to any discussion on the forums.

Edited by Castle Mischief
Link to comment

I've been giving a lot of thought to issues related to caches put out by brand new cachers. There can be (obviously not always) problems with coordinates being wrong, containers being the wrong size and the terrain/difficulty numbers being way too high. I've proposed an idea to several of my caching friends that Groundspeak consider limiting the ability to hide new caches to cachers that have found more than 100 hides. Since they have universally said they thought it was a good idea I thought I would bring it up here. This is in no means a slap at brand new cachers. I just think we need to afford them the time to familiarize themselves with different hide styles, containers and various terrain/difficulty numbers before putting out new caches. I'm sure there are exceptions to every rule and this is just my opinion based on my experiences in the field. As as more experienced cacher I have made my fair share of mistakes when posting new caches. I do wonder though what kind of affect this would have on the game. Perhaps the 100 cache milestone (or some other arbitrary number) shows a dedication to the game that would ensure long term cache maintenance? Thoughts?

 

People can fake finds to get to 100. There's no one auditing anyone's finds.

Link to comment

I've been giving a lot of thought to issues related to caches put out by brand new cachers. There can be (obviously not always) problems with coordinates being wrong, containers being the wrong size and the terrain/difficulty numbers being way too high. I've proposed an idea to several of my caching friends that Groundspeak consider limiting the ability to hide new caches to cachers that have found more than 100 hides. Since they have universally said they thought it was a good idea I thought I would bring it up here. This is in no means a slap at brand new cachers. I just think we need to afford them the time to familiarize themselves with different hide styles, containers and various terrain/difficulty numbers before putting out new caches. I'm sure there are exceptions to every rule and this is just my opinion based on my experiences in the field. As as more experienced cacher I have made my fair share of mistakes when posting new caches. I do wonder though what kind of affect this would have on the game. Perhaps the 100 cache milestone (or some other arbitrary number) shows a dedication to the game that would ensure long term cache maintenance? Thoughts?

 

People can fake finds to get to 100. There's no one auditing anyone's finds.

 

Sounds like a good CO in the making.

 

It might look suspicious if the new CO registers on Friday. Finds 100 on Saturday and posts a hide on Sunday. If he plants a bad cache hide on on Sunday I think some people might be calling him out on the unusual number of finds the previous day. He'd probably end up on a lot of ignore lists.

 

Personally, I'd like to see a limit to the number of caches that can be placed, at first.

 

Everyone gets one cache hide after registeration. Then there's a time period of maybe 2 months after planting the first cache before the gates are opened to hiding as many caches as a CO can handle.

 

It gives the newbie a chance to try on cache ownership. Kick the tires. See if they have the staying power and the desire to maintain both the listing and the container. Give them a chance to see how their container of choice holds up. See if the location they picked was a good one or whether it turned out to be too wet, too muggly, unattractive, etc.

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...