Jump to content

Newbies placing caches


kennelbarb

Recommended Posts

I hate going out after a new cache, spending 60-90 minutes in the woods searching every possible hiding spot within 100 ft of GZ with no luck. Then I come home to discover the the CO has only a few finds to his credit. Today the cache I searched for, had a CO with NO finds at all, not a single one. Part of it is my fault for not researching the CO's before I head out. But it makes a lot of sense to me, to require a minimum amount of caching experience before new cachers place their first cache. They would learn what size a 'regular' really is, terrain ratings, how to read coordinates and why they're important. Even if they've only made 10-12 finds, they have some idea of what this sport is really like. I don't want to make this elitist or discourage new cachers, but it wouldn't be hard to require 'some' experience. JMO

Link to comment

Just because an account doesn't have any finds on it doesn't mean that it is a newby cacher. It is not uncommon for teams to use a separate account for hiding caches and their personal accounts for logging them. I have caches hidden under my account and others hidden under a team account. If you look at the team account, it has zero finds and last logon is probably many months ago.

 

I've also found really bad hides and really lame caches hidden by cachers with thousands of finds.... :angry:

Link to comment
Part of it is my fault for not researching the CO's before I head out.

 

I think you have answered it. If you can pre-determine the quality of a cache by the formula you use, then thats what you might have to do.

 

I don't want to make this elitist or discourage new cachers,

 

I have my doubts that TPTB will ever make a requirement on placing a cache by the persons "find" experience. I think this would discourage future cachers. People could find all the ammo cans they need just to get the numbers needed to qualify, but would that really make them any more qualified than before? Only if they were going to place just ammo cans. There is a learning curve in this whole game, and it is only a game. JMO

Link to comment

If a user has a good idea that falls within the guidelines, I do not see any reason whatsoever to hold up a cache placement. Experienced user put out hides with bad coords and other serious mistakes all the time.

 

Besides - it is all too easy to run out and get 50 to 100 finds in an afternoon these days. I would hardly refer to that person as experienced.

 

Maybe, instead of some arbitrary number of finds, a simple guidelines test would work better before publishing any caches. I have proposed this for many years - even through together a sample test.

Link to comment

Groundspeak is already considering some guidelines for placing caches.

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

I always find it amusing that everytime someone brings up a topic like, "newbies placing caches" or "iphone users bad logging techniques" the overly sensitive types come out and try to defend said groups. Obviously there are exceptions to every rule. I'm positive that many new cachers hide great caches and many old time cachers hide crummy caches. I'm also equally sure that many iphone users have good logging etiquette and plenty of GPS users type "tftc" or the like, only. It's just more likely for certain types of cachers to have certain annoying habits. A new cacher is absolutely going to make more mistakes in several ways. A rookie in anything is more likely too. I don't understand what is hard to understand about that fact of life. People should just accept it and quit taking offense to it. If you are one of the exceptions, then kudo's to you. You are the exception, not the rule.

Edited by M 5
Link to comment
If a user has a good idea that falls within the guidelines, I do not see any reason whatsoever to hold up a cache placement. Experienced user put out hides with bad coords and other serious mistakes all the time.

 

Besides - it is all too easy to run out and get 50 to 100 finds in an afternoon these days. I would hardly refer to that person as experienced.

 

Maybe, instead of some arbitrary number of finds, a simple guidelines test would work better before publishing any caches. I have proposed this for many years - even through together a sample test.

Just as it is possible for an experienced poster to misspell a common word :angry: .
Link to comment
Groundspead is already considering some guidelines for placing caches.

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

I always find it amusing that everytime someone brings up a topic like, "newbies placing caches" or "iphone users bad logging techniques" the overly sensitive types come out and try to defend said groups.

<snicker> OK, let's hear it from you overly sensitive types!! </snicker>
Link to comment

I'm not advocating a policy change but...

 

There is a higher probability of problems with newbie cachers hides. Latest example...

 

A cacher with FOUR finds that has placed three caches. The coordinates are 250ft off and three unanswered NM's have been placed. They haven't found a cache since their initial burst in the spring.

 

I recommend new cachers wait a while before placing a cache. By waiting you'll find out if you're going to get burned out, you'll find out what maintenance issues to watch for, and you'll have more ideas on the kind of hides you can place.

Link to comment
Groundspead is already considering some guidelines for placing caches.

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

I always find it amusing that everytime someone brings up a topic like, "newbies placing caches" or "iphone users bad logging techniques" the overly sensitive types come out and try to defend said groups.

<snicker> OK, let's hear it from you overly sensitive types!! </snicker>

 

There are plenty out there, I'm sure they will.

 

P.S. and yes, it was worded that way to be a little bit of a goad. :angry:

Link to comment
Groundspead is already considering some guidelines for placing caches.

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

I always find it amusing that everytime someone brings up a topic like, "newbies placing caches" or "iphone users bad logging techniques" the overly sensitive types come out and try to defend said groups.

<snicker> OK, let's hear it from you overly sensitive types!! </snicker>

 

istockphoto_2447147_raised_hand.jpg

 

That's ME!!! An overly sensitive type.

 

But I still think newbies make rotten cache placers. Sorry, that's my opinion.

 

I like the example recently of the new cacher who had only found one, and was trying to hide a cache on private property using only google earth for coordinates. After 17 coordinate changes it was archived with no finds on it.

 

Last week I was out looking for caches in the Seattle Peace PUzzle series I was so glad to be looking for a series of finds that was all by seasoned cachers. I didn't have to worry about the caches being hidden with an I-phone or anything like that. It was a great pleasure. I knew every hide was by someone with a good GPS who knew how to use it. It was really great. Nice feeling. No guesswork. Just caching.

 

ps. actually i just realized the owner of this thread is one of the two people I went looking for that peace puzzle series last weekend. LOL. We were all talking about how nice it was to know the hides were good ones because they are all experienced cachers in that series.

Edited by Sol seaker
Link to comment
Groundspead is already considering some guidelines for placing caches.

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

I always find it amusing that everytime someone brings up a topic like, "newbies placing caches" or "iphone users bad logging techniques" the overly sensitive types come out and try to defend said groups.

<snicker> OK, let's hear it from you overly sensitive types!! </snicker>

 

There are plenty out there, I'm sure they will.

 

P.S. and yes, it was worded that way to be a little bit of a goad. :angry:

One thing the forum regulars have never been accused of is being overly-sensitive. Thick-skinned is more like it.
Link to comment
Groundspead is already considering some guidelines for placing caches.

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

I always find it amusing that everytime someone brings up a topic like, "newbies placing caches" or "iphone users bad logging techniques" the overly sensitive types come out and try to defend said groups.

<snicker> OK, let's hear it from you overly sensitive types!! </snicker>

 

There are plenty out there, I'm sure they will.

 

P.S. and yes, it was worded that way to be a little bit of a goad. :grin:

One thing the forum regulars have never been accused of is being overly-sensitive. Thick-skinned is more like it.

 

Hard-headed! :angry:

Link to comment

Thank God some of you were not around back in 2002. There were exactly 5 caches within a 100 mile radius of me. Folks with 100 finds were nearly unheard of. Somehow, by some miracle, we got enough caches out over the year's to get where we are today. Rookie mistakes and all. It would have been mid 2004 before I could have hidden a sigle cache (even though I had over 40 by then).

 

I cannot understand how finding a few more parking lot lamp skirt lifters to fill in an arbitrary number is going to make anybody a better cache hider. Especially if they have a decent container and a good spot in mind already. Knowing the guidelines is a far better measure.

Link to comment

Thank God some of you were not around back in 2002. There were exactly 5 caches within a 100 mile radius of me. Folks with 100 finds were nearly unheard of. Somehow, by some miracle, we got enough caches out over the year's to get where we are today. Rookie mistakes and all. It would have been mid 2004 before I could have hidden a sigle cache (even though I had over 40 by then).

 

I cannot understand how finding a few more parking lot lamp skirt lifters to fill in an arbitrary number is going to make anybody a better cache hider. Especially if they have a decent container and a good spot in mind already. Knowing the guidelines is a far better measure.

 

Once again. It is under review in the Feedback section:

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

There will be an official decision made somewhat soon, but it will most likely be a guideline test or course, not a find count. I know people bring up in the forums all the time about a find count, but I've never seen a serious consideration for a certain number of finds before hiding a cache in the Feedback section. People bring it up in the feedback site in the comments section, but I've never seen a "numbers only qualification" get a lot of votes

Link to comment

Thank God some of you were not around back in 2002. There were exactly 5 caches within a 100 mile radius of me. Folks with 100 finds were nearly unheard of. Somehow, by some miracle, we got enough caches out over the year's to get where we are today. Rookie mistakes and all. It would have been mid 2004 before I could have hidden a sigle cache (even though I had over 40 by then).

 

I cannot understand how finding a few more parking lot lamp skirt lifters to fill in an arbitrary number is going to make anybody a better cache hider. Especially if they have a decent container and a good spot in mind already. Knowing the guidelines is a far better measure.

 

Once again. It is under review in the Feedback section:

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

There will be an official decision made somewhat soon, but it will most likely be a guideline test or course, not a find count. I know people bring up in the forums all the time about a find count, but I've never seen a serious consideration for a certain number of finds before hiding a cache in the Feedback section. People bring it up in the feedback site in the comments section, but I've never seen a "numbers only qualification" get a lot of votes

 

I would not exactly look for a decision "soon".

 

I get that the idea is being considered and my rant only really addresses the idea presented in this thread.

Link to comment

KennelBarb, it seems to be the exact opposite where I live. the people with all the finds won't maintain their own caches, thus causing us "newbies" to have to click the "needs maintenance" or "needs archived" box, thus causing the local people with even more finds to berate us for creating problems for the people that won't maintain their caches. A certain percentage of the population will be murderers. a certain percentage won't hide their caches correctly, a certain percenatage won't maintain their caches. it has nothing to do with their number of finds. I'm certain that you've done something wrong in your life, just as I have, but I'm not blaming you for it, so please stop blaming the "newbies" because you couldn't find their cache....... you did log a DNF, didn'tyou?

Link to comment

KennelBarb, it seems to be the exact opposite where I live. the people with all the finds won't maintain their own caches, thus causing us "newbies" to have to click the "needs maintenance" or "needs archived" box, thus causing the local people with even more finds to berate us for creating problems for the people that won't maintain their caches. A certain percentage of the population will be murderers. a certain percentage won't hide their caches correctly, a certain percenatage won't maintain their caches. it has nothing to do with their number of finds. I'm certain that you've done something wrong in your life, just as I have, but I'm not blaming you for it, so please stop blaming the "newbies" because you couldn't find their cache....... you did log a DNF, didn'tyou?

 

Luckily I knew one of the newbies who was hiding caches around here.

 

She didn't have a car nor GPS, so I went and picked her up and we went around to her placed caches and got good coordinates on them.

 

One was off 120 feet (placed with her I-phone). I went searching for each of them first (because I had not found them all yet, she had just gotten numerous complaints on them) and on one she had to resort to telling me "hotter" and "colder" because the coords were so far from the actual cache.

 

I got coords for her with my GPS. She has continued to cache, so, like the majority of people who go looking for more than a few, she has now gotten a real GPS.

 

PS. I love the idea of cachers taking a test first before placing a cache.

One of the questions must be: DO YOU HAVE A GPS??

Edited by Sol seaker
Link to comment

Thank God some of you were not around back in 2002. There were exactly 5 caches within a 100 mile radius of me. Folks with 100 finds were nearly unheard of. Somehow, by some miracle, we got enough caches out over the year's to get where we are today. Rookie mistakes and all. It would have been mid 2004 before I could have hidden a sigle cache (even though I had over 40 by then).

 

I cannot understand how finding a few more parking lot lamp skirt lifters to fill in an arbitrary number is going to make anybody a better cache hider. Especially if they have a decent container and a good spot in mind already. Knowing the guidelines is a far better measure.

 

Once again. It is under review in the Feedback section:

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title[/url

 

There will be an official decision made somewhat soon, but it will most likely be a guideline test or course, not a find count. I know people bring up in the forums all the time about a find count, but I've never seen a serious consideration for a certain number of finds before hiding a cache in the Feedback section. People bring it up in the feedback site in the comments section, but I've never seen a "numbers only qualification" get a lot of votes

 

I would not exactly look for a decision "soon".

 

I get that the idea is being considered and my rant only really addresses the idea presented in this thread.

 

 

I don't expect it soon, but I would expect at least an update "somewhat soon" If not, then the feedback site is not working well. They need to at least keep us posted, instead of an idea in limbo with a "planned" or "under review" although that is off topic and should be another thread.

 

The idea in the thread was a very low expectation of 10-12 finds. As several people have stated, no number would really accomlish the goal of identifying when a new cacher is ready to hide a cache. I doubt there can, or ever will, be a great solution. That being said. If there is a course or a test, then unless they have a proxy take it for them, at least they should have been forced to read the available information and be able to avoid a few hiding pitfalls

Link to comment

Thank God some of you were not around back in 2002. There were exactly 5 caches within a 100 mile radius of me. Folks with 100 finds were nearly unheard of. Somehow, by some miracle, we got enough caches out over the year's to get where we are today. Rookie mistakes and all. It would have been mid 2004 before I could have hidden a sigle cache (even though I had over 40 by then).

 

I cannot understand how finding a few more parking lot lamp skirt lifters to fill in an arbitrary number is going to make anybody a better cache hider. Especially if they have a decent container and a good spot in mind already. Knowing the guidelines is a far better measure.

 

We started caching in 2001. Planted in 2002. It seems back then that those who were planting were trying to create a good caching experience. We quickly fixed problems that were reported. We also provided good hints. We didn't have cell phones and google maps/earth, we all used dedicated GPS units. Everyone seemed to be making an effort to get the most accurate waypoints that we could by taking multiple readings. Now we seem to be getting more argumentative newbies who tell finders that yeah maybe their coordinates aren't accurate and maybe they planted on private property but...."Screw privte P. it's in a bush by the fence before the 3rd brown town house under a leaf inside a bush on the left going into the drive way ok :anibad:! "

 

Plus, there seems to me that back in 2002 the people who were hiding caches were adults. More and more it seems like the new COs that hide poor quality caches are preteens/teens who come into the game without any commitment or investment or understanding of the the hobby.

 

Showing some level of commitment wouldn't hurt the game. A wait period of 3 months after registration could weed out the fly-by-nighters. If someone won't wait 3 months before submitting a cache, how likely are they to be responsible COs that will maintain their caches?

Link to comment

[qIf there is a course or a test, then unless they have a proxy take it for them, at least they should have been forced to read the available information and be able to avoid a few hiding pitfalls

 

How do you FORCE them. The current cache submition page has a check box stating that you have read the guidelines. Obviously, many simply click the box even though they have done no such thing.

Link to comment

KennelBarb, it seems to be the exact opposite where I live. the people with all the finds won't maintain their own caches, thus causing us "newbies" to have to click the "needs maintenance" or "needs archived" box, thus causing the local people with even more finds to berate us for creating problems for the people that won't maintain their caches. A certain percentage of the population will be murderers. a certain percentage won't hide their caches correctly, a certain percenatage won't maintain their caches. it has nothing to do with their number of finds. I'm certain that you've done something wrong in your life, just as I have, but I'm not blaming you for it, so please stop blaming the "newbies" because you couldn't find their cache....... you did log a DNF, didn'tyou?

AMEN!

Link to comment

I hate going out after a new cache, spending 60-90 minutes in the woods searching every possible hiding spot within 100 ft of GZ with no luck. Then I come home to discover the the CO has only a few finds to his credit. Today the cache I searched for, had a CO with NO finds at all, not a single one. Part of it is my fault for not researching the CO's before I head out. But it makes a lot of sense to me, to require a minimum amount of caching experience before new cachers place their first cache. They would learn what size a 'regular' really is, terrain ratings, how to read coordinates and why they're important. Even if they've only made 10-12 finds, they have some idea of what this sport is really like. I don't want to make this elitist or discourage new cachers, but it wouldn't be hard to require 'some' experience. JMO

 

I hid this ~Cache~ a few years ago. Its still alive and kicking. And I sure didn't have a lot of finds back then, and still don't have a lot of finds. What experience can be gained from looking under some lamposts or parkbences for a altoids tin. NONE!!

Link to comment

[qIf there is a course or a test, then unless they have a proxy take it for them, at least they should have been forced to read the available information and be able to avoid a few hiding pitfalls

 

How do you FORCE them. The current cache submition page has a check box stating that you have read the guidelines. Obviously, many simply click the box even though they have done no such thing.

 

Instead of rehashing previously posted info, if your curious, you can read the entire thread.

Link to comment

[qIf there is a course or a test, then unless they have a proxy take it for them, at least they should have been forced to read the available information and be able to avoid a few hiding pitfalls

 

How do you FORCE them. The current cache submition page has a check box stating that you have read the guidelines. Obviously, many simply click the box even though they have done no such thing.

 

Instead of rehashing previously posted info, if your curious, you can read the entire thread.

 

I guess I'm lost here. My point is: How can you FORCE (your word) anyone to do anything on the Internet?

BTW, I have read the entire thread.

Link to comment

I am getting a big chuckle out of the old timers who think hiding is some how rocket science.

 

All it takes is a little research and some time playing with what ever GPSr your using.

 

Its just common sense. I placed my first cache after only 7 finds.

My cache count is 6 now and so far no complaints.

 

And the world did not come to and end.

Edited by Scooter Rider
Link to comment

Thank God some of you were not around back in 2002. There were exactly 5 caches within a 100 mile radius of me. Folks with 100 finds were nearly unheard of. Somehow, by some miracle, we got enough caches out over the year's to get where we are today. Rookie mistakes and all. It would have been mid 2004 before I could have hidden a sigle cache (even though I had over 40 by then).

 

I cannot understand how finding a few more parking lot lamp skirt lifters to fill in an arbitrary number is going to make anybody a better cache hider. Especially if they have a decent container and a good spot in mind already. Knowing the guidelines is a far better measure.

 

Once again. It is under review in the Feedback section:

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

There will be an official decision made somewhat soon, but it will most likely be a guideline test or course, not a find count. I know people bring up in the forums all the time about a find count, but I've never seen a serious consideration for a certain number of finds before hiding a cache in the Feedback section. People bring it up in the feedback site in the comments section, but I've never seen a "numbers only qualification" get a lot of votes

 

Good answer. Yes, this is not 2002 anymore. The website is coming up on 4,000,000 members. There was probably less than 100,000 then. I joined a year and a half after Starbrand, and was #152,000. "They" (and we) are seeing tons and tons of horrible newbie hides. So much so that TPTB actually had a rather strongly worded statement in one of the weekly newletters this past August encouraging people to get several finds under their belt before considering hiding a cache.

 

And no, I don't think all "newbies" are dumb, all "newbies" are putting out horrible hides, or anything else anyone wants to try to pin on me. I'm sure Scooter Rider, for example, is a technically savvy responsible adult, and their caches are fine. But the sheer number of bad newbie hides has taken off like a rocket to the moon.

 

And keep in mind, we're talking "guideline test" here, not raw number of finds.

Link to comment

[qIf there is a course or a test, then unless they have a proxy take it for them, at least they should have been forced to read the available information and be able to avoid a few hiding pitfalls

 

How do you FORCE them. The current cache submition page has a check box stating that you have read the guidelines. Obviously, many simply click the box even though they have done no such thing.

 

Instead of rehashing previously posted info, if your curious, you can read the entire thread.

 

I guess I'm lost here. My point is: How can you FORCE (your word) anyone to do anything on the Internet?

BTW, I have read the entire thread.

 

There is a "under review" idea that proposes some sort of test or course you have to complete before you can hide a cache. and my quote was "unless they have a proxy take it for them, at least they should have been forced to read the available information and be able to avoid a few hiding pitfalls"

I never said they would for sure, but most will just go through it themselves than have a proxy take it for them. You can't just pick out a word, you have to put things in context.

Edited by M 5
Link to comment
Part of it is my fault for not researching the CO's before I head out.

 

I think you have answered it. If you can pre-determine the quality of a cache by the formula you use, then thats what you might have to do.

 

I don't want to make this elitist or discourage new cachers,

 

I have my doubts that TPTB will ever make a requirement on placing a cache by the persons "find" experience. I think this would discourage future cachers. People could find all the ammo cans they need just to get the numbers needed to qualify, but would that really make them any more qualified than before? Only if they were going to place just ammo cans. There is a learning curve in this whole game, and it is only a game. JMO

its not about finding the caches, its about being familiar with their GPS.

in an ideal world, iphones and other "smart"phones wouldn't be able to take coord readings.

Edited by power69
Link to comment

Thank God some of you were not around back in 2002. There were exactly 5 caches within a 100 mile radius of me. Folks with 100 finds were nearly unheard of. Somehow, by some miracle, we got enough caches out over the year's to get where we are today. Rookie mistakes and all. It would have been mid 2004 before I could have hidden a sigle cache (even though I had over 40 by then).

 

I cannot understand how finding a few more parking lot lamp skirt lifters to fill in an arbitrary number is going to make anybody a better cache hider. Especially if they have a decent container and a good spot in mind already. Knowing the guidelines is a far better measure.

 

Once again. It is under review in the Feedback section:

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

There will be an official decision made somewhat soon, but it will most likely be a guideline test or course, not a find count. I know people bring up in the forums all the time about a find count, but I've never seen a serious consideration for a certain number of finds before hiding a cache in the Feedback section. People bring it up in the feedback site in the comments section, but I've never seen a "numbers only qualification" get a lot of votes

 

Good answer. Yes, this is not 2002 anymore. The website is coming up on 4,000,000 members. There was probably less than 100,000 then. I joined a year and a half after Starbrand, and was #152,000. "They" (and we) are seeing tons and tons of horrible newbie hides. So much so that TPTB actually had a rather strongly worded statement in one of the weekly newletters this past August encouraging people to get several finds under their belt before considering hiding a cache.

 

And no, I don't think all "newbies" are dumb, all "newbies" are putting out horrible hides, or anything else anyone wants to try to pin on me. I'm sure Scooter Rider, for example, is a technically savvy responsible adult, and their caches are fine. But the sheer number of bad newbie hides has taken off like a rocket to the moon.

 

And keep in mind, we're talking "guideline test" here, not raw number of finds.

 

I did not pick out a word and put it out of context.

 

I contend that there is no way you can force anyone to do anything on the Internet. Today I got a Google news alert on a subject that I was particularly interested in. The story was so flawed that I was absolutely compelled to write a comment. This required that I registered an account. "Joe Smuck" is now a registered account on that newspapers site.

 

All Groundspeak can do is try to educate. There is no way to force anyone to read your page on the Internet.

Link to comment

Thank God some of you were not around back in 2002. There were exactly 5 caches within a 100 mile radius of me. Folks with 100 finds were nearly unheard of. Somehow, by some miracle, we got enough caches out over the year's to get where we are today. Rookie mistakes and all. It would have been mid 2004 before I could have hidden a sigle cache (even though I had over 40 by then).

 

I cannot understand how finding a few more parking lot lamp skirt lifters to fill in an arbitrary number is going to make anybody a better cache hider. Especially if they have a decent container and a good spot in mind already. Knowing the guidelines is a far better measure.

 

Once again. It is under review in the Feedback section:

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

There will be an official decision made somewhat soon, but it will most likely be a guideline test or course, not a find count. I know people bring up in the forums all the time about a find count, but I've never seen a serious consideration for a certain number of finds before hiding a cache in the Feedback section. People bring it up in the feedback site in the comments section, but I've never seen a "numbers only qualification" get a lot of votes

 

Good answer. Yes, this is not 2002 anymore. The website is coming up on 4,000,000 members. There was probably less than 100,000 then. I joined a year and a half after Starbrand, and was #152,000. "They" (and we) are seeing tons and tons of horrible newbie hides. So much so that TPTB actually had a rather strongly worded statement in one of the weekly newletters this past August encouraging people to get several finds under their belt before considering hiding a cache.

 

And no, I don't think all "newbies" are dumb, all "newbies" are putting out horrible hides, or anything else anyone wants to try to pin on me. I'm sure Scooter Rider, for example, is a technically savvy responsible adult, and their caches are fine. But the sheer number of bad newbie hides has taken off like a rocket to the moon.

 

And keep in mind, we're talking "guideline test" here, not raw number of finds.

 

I did not pick out a word and put it out of context.

 

I contend that there is no way you can force anyone to do anything on the Internet. Today I got a Google news alert on a subject that I was particularly interested in. The story was so flawed that I was absolutely compelled to write a comment. This required that I registered an account. "Joe Smuck" is now a registered account on that newspapers site.

 

All Groundspeak can do is try to educate. There is no way to force anyone to read your page on the Internet.

 

Very good user name. It's very obvious, that if you make a course or test as a requirement to complete, that most users will just go through it. Instead of going to the trouble of figuring a way of getting around it another way. Of course you will have some fine upstanding geocachers figure a way around it. I also said in my previous post, that there will never be a perfect system. That is also obvious. If you force hiders to either go thru the process or figure out a convoluted way around it, you will make the game a certain percentage better. I really don't think anyone is naive enough to think it will solve any problems, but lessening is a good thing.

Edited by M 5
Link to comment

I live in an area of essentially low cache density. If you want to get up to 100 caches you will have to travel. If you have mobility issues and want to get up to 100 caches you will have to travel further. And we don't have a lot of cachers here either.

 

The comments that anyone can find 100 caches in no time flat are just wrong and don't take into account that there are many people who don't live in cache dense areas. There are many people who can only seek some of the terrains due to their issues. People limited on limited incomes that can't travel all over the place to find caches. I don't believe limiting who can hide caches to those who have 100 finds or more is a good idea based on who gets excluded from this.

 

If people have such a great problem with the newer folks hiding caches in their areas maybe contacting newer members of the community and talking to them and offering to mentor them would be a better way to expend energy than complaining about it and wanting to put arbitrary rules in place.

 

I think a little better layout of the website wouldn't be a bad idea. I agree it's not the most user friendly site in the world.

Link to comment
Groundspead is already considering some guidelines for placing caches.

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

I always find it amusing that everytime someone brings up a topic like, "newbies placing caches" or "iphone users bad logging techniques" the overly sensitive types come out and try to defend said groups.

<snicker> OK, let's hear it from you overly sensitive types!! </snicker>

 

istockphoto_2447147_raised_hand.jpg

That's ME!!! An overly sensitive type.

 

But I still think newbies make rotten cache placers. Sorry, that's my opinion.

 

I like the example recently of the new cacher who had only found one, and was trying to hide a cache on private property using only google earth for coordinates. After 17 coordinate changes it was archived with no finds on it.

 

Last week I was out looking for caches in the Seattle Peace PUzzle series I was so glad to be looking for a series of finds that was all by seasoned cachers. I didn't have to worry about the caches being hidden with an I-phone or anything like that. It was a great pleasure. I knew every hide was by someone with a good GPS who knew how to use it. It was really great. Nice feeling. No guesswork. Just caching.

 

ps. actually i just realized the owner of this thread is one of the two people I went looking for that peace puzzle series last weekend. LOL. We were all talking about how nice it was to know the hides were good ones because they are all experienced cachers in that series.

 

I've been watching a cache that is fitting to this topic! A newbie placed it and after several DNF from seasoned cachers, the Reviewer Archived it and now they are in a yelling match over it! It's been rather humerous to watch! Check it out: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2HY40

Edited by huntress123
Link to comment

I've been watching a cache that is fitting to this topic! A newbie placed it and after several DNF from seasoned cachers, the Reviewer Archived it and now they are in a yelling match over it! It's been rather humerous to watch! Check it out: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2HY40

Wow! That's wild.

 

8 finds, 4 hidden. Three of the four are disabled or archived due to bad coordinates and the fourth has an eyeglasses case that the FTF found laying on the ground and no finds since.

 

As for that cache, the coordinates are far from anything resembling the description of the GZ (at water's edge) and appear to be a starting place to walk to get to the cache.

 

Here's a log entry from the CO:

Go to the coordinates, and find the trail, And follow it to the area. I am very angry I am getting blamed for everyone else failing to actually try and look for it.
Link to comment
If a user has a good idea that falls within the guidelines, I do not see any reason whatsoever to hold up a cache placement. Experienced user put out hides with bad coords and other serious mistakes all the time.

 

Besides - it is all too easy to run out and get 50 to 100 finds in an afternoon these days. I would hardly refer to that person as experienced.

 

Maybe, instead of some arbitrary number of finds, a simple guidelines test would work better before publishing any caches. I have proposed this for many years - even through together a sample test.

Just as it is possible for an experienced poster to misspell a common word :anibad: .

 

Technically, the poster used the wrong word. He spelled *through* correctly.

 

I've seen bad hides by "newbies" and "ancients" alike. It is what it is. A game this big, with this much independence, not everything is going to be perfect to your standards. Enjoy the fresh air and move on to the next cache.

Link to comment
Groundspead is already considering some guidelines for placing caches.

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/7577...cours?ref=title

 

I always find it amusing that everytime someone brings up a topic like, "newbies placing caches" or "iphone users bad logging techniques" the overly sensitive types come out and try to defend said groups.

<snicker> OK, let's hear it from you overly sensitive types!! </snicker>

 

istockphoto_2447147_raised_hand.jpg

That's ME!!! An overly sensitive type.

 

But I still think newbies make rotten cache placers. Sorry, that's my opinion.

 

I like the example recently of the new cacher who had only found one, and was trying to hide a cache on private property using only google earth for coordinates. After 17 coordinate changes it was archived with no finds on it.

 

Last week I was out looking for caches in the Seattle Peace PUzzle series I was so glad to be looking for a series of finds that was all by seasoned cachers. I didn't have to worry about the caches being hidden with an I-phone or anything like that. It was a great pleasure. I knew every hide was by someone with a good GPS who knew how to use it. It was really great. Nice feeling. No guesswork. Just caching.

 

ps. actually i just realized the owner of this thread is one of the two people I went looking for that peace puzzle series last weekend. LOL. We were all talking about how nice it was to know the hides were good ones because they are all experienced cachers in that series.

 

I've been watching a cache that is fitting to this topic! A newbie placed it and after several DNF from seasoned cachers, the Reviewer Archived it and now they are in a yelling match over it! It's been rather humerous to watch! Check it out: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2HY40

 

What's curious about this cache is that it was archived by the reviewer, even though it has not one DNF on it. Are we Geocaching here or just playing with our computers? Did anyone actually go and try to find it?

 

Sad!

Link to comment

I hate going out after a new cache, spending 60-90 minutes in the woods searching every possible hiding spot within 100 ft of GZ with no luck. Then I come home to discover the the CO has only a few finds to his credit. Today the cache I searched for, had a CO with NO finds at all, not a single one. Part of it is my fault for not researching the CO's before I head out. But it makes a lot of sense to me, to require a minimum amount of caching experience before new cachers place their first cache. They would learn what size a 'regular' really is, terrain ratings, how to read coordinates and why they're important. Even if they've only made 10-12 finds, they have some idea of what this sport is really like. I don't want to make this elitist or discourage new cachers, but it wouldn't be hard to require 'some' experience. JMO

Guess that will teach you to go out after a newbie hide and to check the CO before you go out for a find. Gotta love the learning curve in Geocaching. Long Live the NEWBIES.

Link to comment

Agreed, to an extent.

 

At our local university, we have someone who teaches geocaching as part of a GIS/Geography course. Every semester his students register on geocaching.com, and then go out and find some nearby caches. They pick up maybe four or five of them.

 

But as part of the class they also have to hide a cache and register it. What we get are some poorly-placed caches that after the end of the semester won't get maintenance because the students head back home. It's frustrating, and my annoyance finally bubbled over when I FTF'd this one: http://coord.info/GC2H0N0

 

On the other hand, this is a game with thousands of players form all over the world who hide things for me to find, and they do it for free. It gives me a great way to learn a new city/town, it's fun to do with my kids [one of whom now has his own account and hid his first cache the other day (with my help)], and that is as hard or easy as I want to make it.

 

So, it's annoying, yeah, but also kind of a wash for me. I was a newbie once, too. Still am, kinda.

Link to comment

....Good answer. Yes, this is not 2002 anymore. The website is coming up on 4,000,000 members. There was probably less than 100,000 then. I joined a year and a half after Starbrand, and was #152,000. "They" (and we) are seeing tons and tons of horrible newbie hides. ....

Maybe I would agree that we see more newbie hide mistakes but I would contend that is ONLY because of the sheer number of newbie cachers as this little game grows nearly exponentially. I think the number of bad hides by experienced cachers has also grown substantially over the years - just because there are more cachers and caches.

Link to comment
Maybe, instead of some arbitrary number of finds, a simple guidelines test would work better before publishing any caches. I have proposed this for many years - even through together a sample test.

Yea, that's what we need, more rules! <_<

This wouldn't require any additional rules. It could be a quick 10 question test to make sure people know the guidelines before hiding. If they get 7 right, they pass. It wouldn't have to be timed, so they could look up the answers before answering.

 

Many cachers have never looked at the guidelines, and this would be a way to get them to do it. I contacted a newer cacher about a cache that was placed directly on school property, and the reply was, "I had no idea they weren't allowed at schools..."

 

If one of the questions was "Are caches allowed on or near school property," that cache probably wouldn't have been placed.

 

To me, this is a better approach than a minimum number of finds. I've seen people with 0 finds place some awesome caches. They were really 0 finds, not a sock puppet or anything. I've also seen people with thousands of finds place horrible caches, some that violate the guidelines.

 

I'm not against anyone places caches, no matter how many hides they have. In the past, cachers were kind of geeky and tech oriented, but with geocaching growing at such a fast rate and more people trying it because of phone apps and almost every GPS talking about it in their instructions, there's a greater chance that people won't read the guidelines before hiding caches.

Link to comment
I guess I'm lost here. My point is: How can you FORCE (your word) anyone to do anything on the Internet?

I'm not a web developer, but I imagine the site could be setup so that the "hide a cache" page is mostly blank until the test has been taken. It would say something like, "Before hiding your first cache, please familiarize yourself with the guidelines and take the online test to continue."

 

Then, once they "pass" something would be set in their account that would allow the full hiding page to appear.

 

Just like how regular members see a page showing the benefits of premium membership when they try to access a feature that's only available for premium members. Once someone is premium member, they see the full version of the site.

Link to comment

I've been watching a cache that is fitting to this topic! A newbie placed it and after several DNF from seasoned cachers, the Reviewer Archived it and now they are in a yelling match over it! It's been rather humerous to watch! Check it out: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2HY40

Wow! That's wild.

 

8 finds, 4 hidden. Three of the four are disabled or archived due to bad coordinates and the fourth has an eyeglasses case that the FTF found laying on the ground and no finds since.

 

As for that cache, the coordinates are far from anything resembling the description of the GZ (at water's edge) and appear to be a starting place to walk to get to the cache.

 

Here's a log entry from the CO:

Go to the coordinates, and find the trail, And follow it to the area. I am very angry I am getting blamed for everyone else failing to actually try and look for it.

 

The worst of both worlds. A newbie hide and a "kid" hide. <_< I know, I'm going to take some hits for that. Profile says occupation is student. Don't know if it's the boy or the girl in the pic. I could tell you some stories about several "kid hides". But I won't. And yes, I know there are plenty of good "kids hides", and any hide by a 14 year old isn't necessarily going to be bad. Statistically though, I'm just sayin'. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Because it is such a beautiful day in Northern New Jersey , I decided to go out at lunch for a new cache closeby. Hidden by a newbie. Found same, not a bad hide, one that has been used before, coordinates good, in a nice spot--only problem the container. Metal candy tin. New one down the road (cause you just can't go for one) also a newbie hide. Good coordinates, nice spot, good hide , only problem container--one of those paper clip holders with the two clips sold by staples. Hiding is a lot harder than finding. But it boils down to coordinates being accurate, with a good hide in a decent spot with a proper container. It comes together with some experience.

Link to comment

I kinda think some people will be good hiders, some won't.

 

I'm new. I have two hides and I think they are pretty nice:) I did have issues with coords on the first one b/c I put it on a bench at a local museum/mansion that was put away for the winter. I noticed before anyone found it but rehid on a cloudy day and got bad readings. FORTUNATELY, we seem to have nice cachers around here, they found it from my clue and politely told me the coords were off. So, I went and got some more readings and fixed it.

 

I think I could have hid the same quality cache even after 5 finds.

 

Some people could find a lot, and their cache will still suck.

Link to comment
I guess I'm lost here. My point is: How can you FORCE (your word) anyone to do anything on the Internet?

I'm not a web developer, but I imagine the site could be setup so that the "hide a cache" page is mostly blank until the test has been taken. It would say something like, "Before hiding your first cache, please familiarize yourself with the guidelines and take the online test to continue."

 

I *am* a developer and that is basically how it would be enforced. Forcing someone to take (and pass) a test before being granted access to a submission form is essentially no different from forcing someone to enter a username/password before viewing a personal site (like a gmail account).

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...