+texasgrillchef Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 THIS THREAD IS ABOUT MY IDEA... NOT ABOUT THE BS going on in the OTHER THREAD! That is WHY I started this thread in the first place. THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT WHAT is going on in the other TRHEAD.[/b] This thread is about MY IDEA and MY IDEA ONLY... SO Please don't lock it... I have no desire for this thread to go into the discussing the other thread is about. Besides that the other thread is NOW way to long to keep up with. 7 pages allready! WAY TO Many. This thread is about MY Idea... not all the other BS on if we should or should not have virtuals. Seems to me IMHO that the OTHER Thread is mostly about if we should or Should not have Virtuals. This thread is NOT about if we should or should not... but simply about the thoughts of MY ideas of the guidelines... NOTHING more NOTHING less! IF you all have a problem with that.. then the point of having forums & freedom of speech and discussion topics is pointless. JMHO. Now on to a DISCUSSION about MY idea for Virtuals. If you like them or if you don't & why. This thread is NOT about if you want or do not want Virtuals, or if we should or should not have virtuals. Period. As most of us know. Geocaching.com is in the process of returning the Virtual Cache back to us. As I can tell, many of you are happy about this, and many of you are not. Either way they will soon be returning. Here is MY idea for the rules/guidelines around the new Virtual cache. IMHO this would be the best solution to keep the majority of geocachers happy. Both those who support the idea of bringing Virtuals back, and to a few of those who don't want them back. Here is the list... (My Idea) 1. Virtuals would ONLY be allowed where a PHYSICAL cache can NOT be placed for any reason. Exmaples of this, where a physical cache would violate local, state, or Federal law's rules & regulations. Second where a land owner/care taker doesn't want a physical cache placed. 2. A Virtual would be the counterpart to a "EARTHCACHE" in that an earthcache relates back to some physical/natural item to the planet earth. A Virtual would relate back to something that is "Man-Made" that is of some importance either locally, state, country or even to the planet. Examples of this would be something historical. Historical landmarks, markers etc.. It could relate as well to something of other importance. Example being a big NFL Stadium... In Dallas TExas... this would be the NEW Dallas Cowboys Stadium. Either way. The location MUST be of some SIGNIFICANT Importance to the community. Ie... Virtuals couldn't be placed at Wally World, Or similar. 3. Logging a Virtual should follow the same idea that having a puzzle on a Mystery cache would be. Logging a virtual would have to be shown by the CO that it is possible to obtain the information to log this cache from the actual GPS location/coordinates of the Virtual. Without entering a business, etc... Logging of a Virtual should also ALWAYS be allowed by simply taking & posting the pic of the geocacher, the GPS at the posted GPS coordinates with the "Proof" of location in the background. The geocacher should have the choice between posting the photo, OR emailing the answers required. Those are the 3 main things I would like to see. There could be other "Guidelines" as well for Virtuals. But at least these 3. One other thing to note. Is all other guidelines that apply to other geocaches would still apply to Virtuals as well. TGC Link to comment
+texasgrillchef Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 To CX1 who posted in my other thread... ----- I like this part but with slight modification. I feel a cacher should be allowed to substitute a personal object other then their gps for photographic evidence. I also don't feel that the cacher should be required to be in the picture. I sometimes cache alone for one thing and I know that some people are uncomfortable posting personal images on-line. I also feel it should be allowed for the cache owner to specify a location for the logging photograph to be taken. Some cache owners like their virtual caches to be a surprise to the cache visitors. Allowing the cache owner to specify a particular bench for example would aid in keeping the surprise element of the cache. I suppose that could be what you refer to as "Proof" above but I would rather the specific spot be left up to the cache owner if they desire. -------------- The reason I suggested that the geocacher be allowed to choose between sending a photo & answering the questions is that answering the questions requires an email. Not somthing that is that easy to do from your iPhone or other smartphone app. IF a geocacher is on vacation for 3 weeks. (Such as I am many times) I want to log the cache now, while it's fresh in my memory. But it may take me 3 weeks to send an email to confirm my find. A CO could "Delete" someones found long in the mean time. Photos are very easy to upload using ones iPhone or Smartphone. So this could still be done within a few minutes of finding & logging the Virtual. I do agree, many don't want to post pics of themselvs. I must admit sometimes I am the same way. I don't always want to post a pic of myself either. So your suggestion that maybe that the geocacher doesn't have to pose in the pic be good as well. There is only one other problem with this. If your not carefull, "Armchair Virtual" cachers could effectively log a virtual. Example.. you have a virtual for the STate Capital of Texas. There are many THOUSANDS of pics of the Texas State Capital that one can easily download from the internet. So any pics, would have to be something that you could NOT download from the net. Thats why I originally suggested that the geocacher be in the pic. Yes, you can photoshop yourself into a pic. But their is software to be able to determine you did that too. Must admit though. No easy answer to that question. There will ALWAYS be cheaters in EVERY game. At some point, we will have to accept that their will be a small percentage that will still "Armchair" cache. TGC Link to comment
+texasgrillchef Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 @Starbrand... Sadly, I know for a fact that the mere availability of such a cache type will have some land managers banning physical caches in a heartbeat. I hope the *new* rules/guidelines somehow inhibit this. --------------- Sadly though, Some land mangers/land owners may still ban physical caches anyways because of the FEW geocachers that aren't respectfull of the land & ruin it for all of us.. Like the saying goes... it only takes one worm, to spoil the bushel of apples. TGC Link to comment
+texasgrillchef Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 @ FOnty Family Overall, these are an interesting set of guidelines, and I happen to agree with you for the most part...however I would be concerned with phrase above, how could a reviewer in some other part of the country (potentially) make this subjective determination? Would reviewers/GS want to get in this kind of debate with COs?...What is important or significant to one person may not be significant to another... Just to play devil advocate, would you allow a virtual of Walmart's first store/corporate head office in Bentonville, Arkansas? Is the birthplace of Walmart and the retailing revolution it caused, a significant event? It seems that the community views the retailer as significant, as do a search of tourist attractions for this area and it is listed as the top attraction. I personally would not view this as a significant location but I bet there would be people who disagree with me. In my humble opinion GS/reviewers should base any guidelines on objective criteria that they can enforce consistently ------------------------------------------------ There is NO perfect solution or answer for ALL the possibilites in geocaching. Sad but true. This same issue applies to all other types of geocaches as well, it is also one of the biggest concerns those who don't want Virtuals back as well. AS in How do you keep Virtuals from popping up at Wally Worlds, or your favorite BK or Wendies, but allow them at some location that for the local population is an important spot. I will admit... That is a hard thing to do. Especially here in Texas where we suposedly only have ONE reviewer. (Or so was told to me by another thread of mine). Texas has many many historic spots. No one in Texas knows where or what all of them are. The Texas Historical society has over 64,000 Historical markers in Texas! 64,000! WOW.. The only suggestion I can think of, is that when a CO submits a Virtual to be published, he/she should maybe be required to explain to the reviewer WHY a Virtual should be placed here, AND WHY a physical cache can not be placed at the CO's location. Will that work? To play along with your "Devils Advocate". IMHO the FIRST Wally world in Bentonville, AR I think SHOULD have a Virtual. IT IS of significance, historical & otherwise to Bentonville, AR. Thus worthy of a Virtual, PROVIDINGthat WALLY WORLD would not[/b[ allow a physical cache on their property. As with MOST ANY rules in life... there are ALWAYS exceptions. Even that rule has an exception! LOL Thats also why in my list.. I did say of SIGNIFICANT value historically to the local community or larger. Think about this. MOST historical places & events are only important to those locally. Of the 64,000 historical markers in Texas. The Vast majority of those are only significant to THAT area of Texas in which the markers were posted. The State capital of Texas is very important to the State of Texas. Worthy of a Virtual. Yet I am sure people in other states could careless about the State Capital of Texas. TO them... The TExas state capital is of no importance to them. The United States CApital. Honestly At least in most US Citizens eyes, Important for everyone in the world. But to others in other countries they could care less about our United States CApital. I think what one has to keep in mind... is perspective. Thats why... "MAYBE" if the CO would be required to explain to the reviewer Why a virtual should be placed here. Maybe that would help. Maybe it wouldn't. I would like to think it would though. TGC Link to comment
+texasgrillchef Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 @CX1 2. A Virtual would be the counterpart to a "EARTHCACHE" in that an earthcache relates back to some physical/natural item to the planet earth. A Virtual would relate back to something that is "Man-Made" that is of some importance either locally, state, country or even to the planet. Examples of this would be something historical. Historical landmarks, markers etc.. It could relate as well to something of other importance. Example being a big NFL Stadium... In Dallas TExas... this would be the NEW Dallas Cowboys Stadium. Either way. The location MUST be of some SIGNIFICANT Importance to the community. Ie... Virtuals couldn't be placed at Wally World, Or similar. I don't quite agree with section 2. Earthcaches have very strict guidelines that do not account for all things natural. I feel that limiting virtual caches to only "man-made" areas would be too limiting to the potential of virtual caches. I also feel that requiring a 'significant' importance is too subjective and places too great a burden on the reviewing staff. ----------------------------- I agree... That the way I worded that part may in fact be to subjective, & far as placing a burden on the reviewing staff, I honestly can't speak for that since I am not a member of the reviewing staff. lol I however, can visulize that it would be more difficult thats for sure. Yes, I agree Earthcaches do have very strict guidelines. IMHO the guidelines as strict as you say they are, I do feel still lead themselvs back to being "Natural" in some way. Very similar to a discussion my wife & I had about if water is or is not a "Renewable resource". It all goes back to what you consider & define "Natural" as. Since we have "Earthcaches" my thoughts were that Virtuals should relate back to something historical, or some architechual (sp?) achievment. The Empire State Building in NY. WHile now is of historical value as well, is still an architechual achievment. The Hoover dam also an Architechual Achievment, now also of historical value as well. What I just don't want to see...As well as I am sure their are others out there that feel the same way. Virtuals popping up in places that are just plain lame. A Virtual for your favorite restaurant... I don't think so... A Virtual for the OLDEST restaurant in your city or state, or in the country... Maybe??? A Virtual for a restuarant where a PRESIDENT of the United States regurally ate at... Again maybe. One of the biggest problems that I think killed Virtuals before, and why it makes making the new guidelines difficult is this fact on how you "regulate" where they will & won't be placed. That Guideline will ALWAYS be subjective to some point. Other than the part... CAn't place a Virtual wherever you can place a physical instead. TGC Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Isn't there an active thread about this topic already? It seems that many other folks managed to post their ideas on how to bring back virts in that one. I guess what you see as "BS", the rest of us see as communicating. Link to comment
2oldfarts (the rockhounders) Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Isn't there an active thread about this topic already? It seems that many other folks managed to post their ideas on how to bring back virts in that one. I guess what you see as "BS", the rest of us see as communicating. Why, it's more fun to "quote" from another thread and post a response here than to post in the Other thread and have people tell you why your ideas aren't that exceptionally good. All the points the OP has quoted (from the other thread) in this thread are discussed in the other thread and I don't see any reason to repost our views here. Join us in the other thread and show your support for those ideas which you support. John Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Hey! Don't you guys know this thread is only for agreeing with the op? Start your own threads.Sheesh! Link to comment
+Sioneva Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I don't think I'm allowed to post here... because it would be my idea to post, and therefore not about the OP's idea. So please ignore this post. It wasn't my idea. Link to comment
+keehotee Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) All virtual caches should be thin at one end, much MUCH thicker in the middle, and then thin again at the far end. That is the theory that I have and which is mine, and what it is too. With apologies to Monty Python et al... Edited January 25, 2011 by keehotee Link to comment
+the4dirtydogs Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I like the taking the picture idea to log the virtual. Link to comment
+cx1 Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 -------------- The reason I suggested that the geocacher be allowed to choose between sending a photo & answering the questions is that answering the questions requires an email. Not somthing that is that easy to do from your iPhone or other smartphone app. IF a geocacher is on vacation for 3 weeks. (Such as I am many times) I want to log the cache now, while it's fresh in my memory. But it may take me 3 weeks to send an email to confirm my find. A CO could "Delete" someones found long in the mean time. Photos are very easy to upload using ones iPhone or Smartphone. So this could still be done within a few minutes of finding & logging the Virtual. I do agree, many don't want to post pics of themselvs. I must admit sometimes I am the same way. I don't always want to post a pic of myself either. So your suggestion that maybe that the geocacher doesn't have to pose in the pic be good as well. There is only one other problem with this. If your not carefull, "Armchair Virtual" cachers could effectively log a virtual. Example.. you have a virtual for the STate Capital of Texas. There are many THOUSANDS of pics of the Texas State Capital that one can easily download from the internet. So any pics, would have to be something that you could NOT download from the net. Thats why I originally suggested that the geocacher be in the pic. Yes, you can photoshop yourself into a pic. But their is software to be able to determine you did that too. Must admit though. No easy answer to that question. There will ALWAYS be cheaters in EVERY game. At some point, we will have to accept that their will be a small percentage that will still "Armchair" cache. TGC Don't get me wrong I really like the idea that a photograph could always be used to satisfy logging requirements. To use your Texas State Capitol for an example: Yes there are thousand of pictures of that on the internet already. Probably many taken near the coordinates you specify in your cache since you would be wanting to take your cache visitors to the best view of the Capitol. So imagine now there is another building very close by with the building postal number etched into a nice piece of brass. Something simple like the numbers 1435 on a brass plaque near the door. Now there are probably few if any photographs of that on the internet. So if you, as the cache owner could specify that the photographs taken for logging the cache must include that plaque and either the cacher's gps or other personal item I think it would greatly reduce the ability for someone to arm-chair log. And yes I agree that there is no way (that would be allowed) that could completely stop arm-chair logging. Link to comment
+cx1 Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Why, it's more fun to "quote" from another thread and post a response here than to post in the Other thread and have people tell you why your ideas aren't that exceptionally good. Actually, (at least where I was quoted) that particular thread was locked. So it is not possible for the OP to respond to my post there. Link to comment
+Castle Mischief Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) IN before THE LOCK. Edited January 25, 2011 by Castle Mischief Link to comment
+GeoGeeBee Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 THIS THREAD IS ABOUT MY IDEA... NOT ABOUT THE BS going on in the OTHER THREAD! This thread is about MY IDEA and MY IDEA ONLY... NOW way to long to keep up with. This thread is about MY Idea... not all the other BS MY ideas of the guidelines... NOTHING more NOTHING less! IF you all have a problem with that.. then the point of having forums & freedom of speech and discussion topics is pointless. JMHO. Now on to a DISCUSSION about MY idea Wow. Just.... wow. Oh, and: IBTL! Link to comment
Recommended Posts