Jump to content

logging temps


Followers 1

Recommended Posts

Sometimes and in some places, cachers have been known to log the event cache page itself multiple times for temp caches at events. It isn't widely done however.

 

Both logging the same cache multiple times and logging temp caches are considered by most cachers I know to be a fairly cheesy thing to do. Just have fun finding them and call it it a day!!!

Edited by StarBrand
Link to comment

In Wisconsin, Ohio, SW Pa. and West Virginia, yes. Everywhere else in the world, no one has a clue what you're talking about. :laughing:

 

OK, that was an exaggeration (but not too big of one). Just see what the others do after the event has happened, and if others are doing it, and you feel you want to log these things and join that crowd, go for it. The whole logging of Temp caches is a dying practice due to peer pressure, but is still practiced in the above mentioned areas, vigorously. :o

 

Bottom line, if your question is "can you do it"?, the answer is "if the event host allows it". And in West Virginia, they usually do.

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

Can you? Yes, if the event owner allows you to. Should you? That is for you to decide.

 

Personally I don't think its appropriate to use this site's resources to log caches that aren't listed here, but that's me. Do what your conscience and the event owner allow.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Now, darn it. I just went to the WV Highlands Spring Fling today - our first event! Met LOTS of awesome people, and being new, I really appreciated seeing all the different types of people. My 9 year-old was with us... A nice lady who goes by FarmGirl4266 won a GeoMate Jr. as a door prize. She had no use for it, and rather than selling it on E-Bay... GAVE it to my son. I swear, I almost cried. You don't see that.

 

Back to the point... We were instructed to log our finds using the "multiple attended" method described above. I got home, and that is what everyone was doing, and that is what I did. Now I feel like a big cornball. I mean, I liked the idea... the stats page still seems to differentiate (by using that "distinct" sub-genre that I have already inquired about). Hope I don't tick a bunch of people off. A previous poster suggested that this is more standard in my area, but I am never one to follow suit blindly. I'm feeling bad. I think I should delete the logs, but I like the idea that it tells me how many regular vs. event caches that I have found.

 

This game has too many ethical delimmas! :unsure:

Link to comment

Now, darn it. I just went to the WV Highlands Spring Fling today - our first event! Met LOTS of awesome people, and being new, I really appreciated seeing all the different types of people. My 9 year-old was with us... A nice lady who goes by FarmGirl4266 won a GeoMate Jr. as a door prize. She had no use for it, and rather than selling it on E-Bay... GAVE it to my son. I swear, I almost cried. You don't see that.

 

Back to the point... We were instructed to log our finds using the "multiple attended" method described above. I got home, and that is what everyone was doing, and that is what I did. Now I feel like a big cornball. I mean, I liked the idea... the stats page still seems to differentiate (by using that "distinct" sub-genre that I have already inquired about). Hope I don't tick a bunch of people off. A previous poster suggested that this is more standard in my area, but I am never one to follow suit blindly. I'm feeling bad. I think I should delete the logs, but I like the idea that it tells me how many regular vs. event caches that I have found.

 

This game has too many ethical delimmas! :unsure:

For most cachers the question easily comes down to "how many permanent caches listed on the GC.com site have you found" and "how many event caches listed on the GC.com site have you attended?"

 

In the vast majority of the cases the online logs for caches found and events attended match with reality. In some cases cachers choose to log extra finds or attended logs when they find temporary caches set out for events. Most cachers think this is not the correct behavior as it does not reflect reality. No ethical dilema required. B)

Link to comment

Now, darn it. I just went to the WV Highlands Spring Fling today - our first event! Met LOTS of awesome people, and being new, I really appreciated seeing all the different types of people. My 9 year-old was with us... A nice lady who goes by FarmGirl4266 won a GeoMate Jr. as a door prize. She had no use for it, and rather than selling it on E-Bay... GAVE it to my son. I swear, I almost cried. You don't see that.

 

Back to the point... We were instructed to log our finds using the "multiple attended" method described above. I got home, and that is what everyone was doing, and that is what I did. Now I feel like a big cornball. I mean, I liked the idea... the stats page still seems to differentiate (by using that "distinct" sub-genre that I have already inquired about). Hope I don't tick a bunch of people off. A previous poster suggested that this is more standard in my area, but I am never one to follow suit blindly. I'm feeling bad. I think I should delete the logs, but I like the idea that it tells me how many regular vs. event caches that I have found.

 

This game has too many ethical delimmas! :unsure:

 

There are very few replies to this thread because I'm telling you, 99% of the Geocaching populace in the world doesn't even know what you're talking about. <_<

 

I see people went to town logging temps at that event. I myself have attended events where people multi-logged (in moderation, maybe like 4 extra logs), but I myself didn't do it. So if you feel this is cheesy (as I do), don't do it, by all means.

 

By the way, awesome story about the Geomate Junior!! B)

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

Now, darn it. I just went to the WV Highlands Spring Fling today - our first event! Met LOTS of awesome people, and being new, I really appreciated seeing all the different types of people. My 9 year-old was with us... A nice lady who goes by FarmGirl4266 won a GeoMate Jr. as a door prize. She had no use for it, and rather than selling it on E-Bay... GAVE it to my son. I swear, I almost cried. You don't see that.

 

Back to the point... We were instructed to log our finds using the "multiple attended" method described above. I got home, and that is what everyone was doing, and that is what I did. Now I feel like a big cornball. I mean, I liked the idea... the stats page still seems to differentiate (by using that "distinct" sub-genre that I have already inquired about). Hope I don't tick a bunch of people off. A previous poster suggested that this is more standard in my area, but I am never one to follow suit blindly. I'm feeling bad. I think I should delete the logs, but I like the idea that it tells me how many regular vs. event caches that I have found.

 

This game has too many ethical delimmas! :unsure:

For most cachers the question easily comes down to "how many permanent caches listed on the GC.com site have you found" and "how many event caches listed on the GC.com site have you attended?"

 

In the vast majority of the cases the online logs for caches found and events attended match with reality. In some cases cachers choose to log extra finds or attended logs when they find temporary caches set out for events. Most cachers think this is not the correct behavior as it does not reflect reality. No ethical dilema required. B)

 

I've seen people who have "attended" hundreds of events, but when you look at their logs they actually attended a handful. I'm not in this game for numbers, but I like my stats to be accurate, so 1 event = 1 log to me. Around here if you log multiple attendeds for the temp caches found at an event you'll get some snickers behind your back and some event owners will delete your logs. It just ain't condoned. I think that's the way it is in most of the geocaching world.

 

As others stated, in a few regions it's a fairly common practice, but even in those areas not everyone does it. So do what feels right to you.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Logging temp 'caches' placed for the attendees of an even is a cheesy way to boost your numbers.

I attended an event in Western PA, with about 12 temp caches on the owners property. All of the caches were clever, and I had fun finding them. Folks who did not attend the event never had a chance. This is where I draw the line. An event can only be attended on that day, and that is the nature of the beast. Temp caches should be only for the enjoyment of the attendees, and not placed to boost their numbers.

So, you can do it, but don't be surprised if a big 'L' suddenly appears on your forehead.

Link to comment

Logging temp 'caches' placed for the attendees of an even is a cheesy way to boost your numbers.

I attended an event in Western PA, with about 12 temp caches on the owners property. All of the caches were clever, and I had fun finding them. Folks who did not attend the event never had a chance. This is where I draw the line. An event can only be attended on that day, and that is the nature of the beast. Temp caches should be only for the enjoyment of the attendees, and not placed to boost their numbers.

So, you can do it, but don't be surprised if a big 'L' suddenly appears on your forehead.

I seem to recall that I found a temp cache last year at GWVIII. I would never consider logging an extra attended log. Attending an event equals attending one event. Finding one listed cache equals finding one listed cache. Since I do not suffer from having multiple personalities I can only see fit to log one attended log or one found it log.

Link to comment

Just a comment from over here on the left side of The Pond...

 

I don't think this practice of multi-logging events to give credit for "temp" caches found occurs over here - At least, I've never seen it done. New caches are often set for events but they are proper gc.com listed caches, not temporary. I've seen a few temporary caches created for events which are used as examples to introduce Geocaching to newbies but they are removed after the event and not meant to be logged officially.

 

Good luck with your ethical dilemma - I'm sure you'll do the right thing ;)

 

MrsB

Link to comment

Drama alert!!! The event mentioned by CachinStrattons has zero multiple attended logs. This forum thread must have been brought to their attention. Although I see there is a "pre main event" event with 900 some attends. Hey, I only mentioned a Geographic region originally. :anibad:

 

 

I'm not even going to try to convince you that it's worth voting for, but here's a new Feedback idea:

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/1614111-disallow-multiple-attended-logs

 

This differs slightly from other Feedback ideas in that it's specific to events.

 

Enjoy - or not - I'm just chucking this out there like a film pot in a bush! :rolleyes:

 

Well, the feedback forum is less than a year old, so I suppose multi-logging of events has never been brought up there. But the longstanding Groundspeak policy has been "if the event host allows it", and I don't see that changing.

 

The practice is dying a slow death on it's own. Wisconsin used to be world renowned for it (a title sice taken over by Ohio <_< ), and a couple of years ago, The Wisconsin Geocaching Association decided not to allow multi-logging at their events any more. People still do it at events hosted by indiviual cachers there. I've also watched the death of this practice in New York, where I live. The last couple of events in our State where some people were multi-logging events, the post-event cache pages turned into total forums on the matter. A major (but not mega) annual event decided they weren't going to allow it any more, and I haven't seen a single event anywhere in The Empire State with multi-logging in probably 3 years.

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

I have a quick question . Im going to an event tomarrow can I log the temp caches as a regular find ?

Have you had your question answered? When I was new at this, I, too, was given that same information that I could claim all of the temps by repeatedly claiming the event. I didn't have any way of knowing that it was something that wasn't done everywhere. I did that at perhaps three events before I stopped. To this day, it is obvious by looking at my stats where it says "has found 356 caches (329 distinct)". Do I walk around with my head hanging down in shame over that? Of course not. But I do wish now that I hadn't. If you have done that, and decide that you'd like to delete the duplicates, do it now rather than after you have important milestone caches that will get messed up.

Link to comment

I have a quick question . Im going to an event tomarrow can I log the temp caches as a regular find ?

Have you had your question answered? When I was new at this, I, too, was given that same information that I could claim all of the temps by repeatedly claiming the event. I didn't have any way of knowing that it was something that wasn't done everywhere. I did that at perhaps three events before I stopped. To this day, it is obvious by looking at my stats where it says "has found 356 caches (329 distinct)". Do I walk around with my head hanging down in shame over that? Of course not. But I do wish now that I hadn't. If you have done that, and decide that you'd like to delete the duplicates, do it now rather than after you have important milestone caches that will get messed up.

 

Excellent advice regarding the milestones, never thought of that.

 

I know many people who have posted multiple attends at events who went back and deleted them. That's because (shocking revelation coming), I'm one of them!! Only one extra attended at an event where the host practiced moderation (maybe 4 temporary caches total). I'm guessing I deleted it within a couple of weeks.

 

But yeah, if your relatively new to events, and they tell you at the event to do it, and you see everyone else doing it on the cache page, I imagine you're just going to do it; all with no idea there is any controversy, or that the practice is limited to a small geographic area of the U.S.

Link to comment

Drama alert!!! The event mentioned by CachinStrattons has zero multiple attended logs. This forum thread must have been brought to their attention. Although I see there is a "pre main event" event with 900 some attends. Hey, I only mentioned a Geographic region originally. :anibad:

 

Not sure what you are looking at. The event has so many multi logs it is hard to find the legit ones.

 

But the longstanding Groundspeak policy has been "if the event host allows it", and I don't see that changing.

 

This has never been GS policy as a search of threads over the years will show, in fact, Jeremy has stated that he thinks the practice is, if memory serves, " stupid ".

 

GS longstanding "position" has been that they have better things to arbitrate undesirable logging practices other than those that directly violate the guidelines, such as those containing profanity or arbitrary deletions. As such they have not taken a official stance and let the CO's and local community decide.

 

It is good to see it dying out, although living close to Wisconsin don't really see evidence of this. It can't go away soon enough.

 

EDITED: To add link to Jeremy's comments.

Edited by baloo&bd
Link to comment

Drama alert!!! The event mentioned by CachinStrattons has zero multiple attended logs. This forum thread must have been brought to their attention. Although I see there is a "pre main event" event with 900 some attends. Hey, I only mentioned a Geographic region originally. :anibad:

 

Not sure what you are looking at. The event has so many multi logs it is hard to find the legit ones.

 

But the longstanding Groundspeak policy has been "if the event host allows it", and I don't see that changing.

 

This has never been GS policy as a search of threads over the years will show, in fact, Jeremy has stated that he thinks the practice is, if memory serves, " stupid ".

 

GS longstanding "position" has been that they have better things to arbitrate undesirable logging practices other than those that directly violate the guidelines, such as those containing profanity or arbitrary deletions. As such they have not taken a official stance and let the CO's and local community decide.

 

It is good to see it dying out, although living close to Wisconsin don't really see evidence of this. It can't go away soon enough.

 

EDITED: To add link to Jeremy's comments.

You left out that it was tptb and the reviewers who initially suggested logging these temporary event caches on the event page. While it is true that Jeremy personally thinks the practice is stupid, it is a mistake to think that this means that GS hasn't supported this logging practice.
Link to comment

Drama alert!!! The event mentioned by CachinStrattons has zero multiple attended logs.

You spoke too soon.

 

A misunderstanding, I think. :lol: The event they logged 70 some times is not the same event they mention in their post. It was one of those "night before" type events.

 

I don't want to make a bunch of quotes, but thanks to Baloo for looking up the old Jeremy post. Geez, he called it stupid? I would have thought "silly". That must have been Travel Bug Prisons that are silly. I wonder if he knows we look up his quotes on things 5 years after he pretty much stopped posting. Not a criticism, I've done it too, more than once. :P

Link to comment

Sometimes and in some places, cachers have been known to log the event cache page itself multiple times for temp caches at events. It isn't widely done however.

 

Both logging the same cache multiple times and logging temp caches are considered by most cachers I know to be a fairly cheesy thing to do. Just have fun finding them and call it it a day!!!

 

That used to be the commonly accepted practice around here but it doesn't happen so much anymore, as far as I can tell. I did it when I first started but then quickly dropped the practice.

Link to comment

Yep - this event covers the multi find category quite nicely. 36 "will attend" logs and 1,637 (make that 1,666) "attended" logs. Should they go for mega event status, do you think? :rolleyes:

 

I think it's ridiculous to log an event 75+ times for temporary caches. But then I also think it's lazy to just hide temporary event caches. Make 'em permanent and get 'em published so everyone can go look for them. If you want to have the event next year, then archive last year's event caches and publish a new series for the next event.

 

For the first event we hosted in 2007, we put out five permanent caches in the woods around it, and for the next event we hosted there a year later, we added two more. We had to archive four of them over time, the other three caches are still active. Between the two events, we had 33 attendees, but the seven permanent caches we hid in the area have had a total of 737 finds -- the most popular has been found almost 250 times since it was published in October 2007.

 

We recently attended a CITO at a state park, followed by an event cache. The event sponsors worked with the park staff and hid over 100 permanent caches in and around the park. If they had been only temp caches, only the 42 or so folks who attended the event could have logged them, but now they're out there for everyone. That's good for the park, that's good for *ALL* geocachers (not just the ones who made the events), and that's good for the game.

 

(edit to update the "find" count on the event)

Edited by hzoi
Link to comment

Point of information....the Wisconsin Geocaching Association has not allowed the logging of temporary caches at any WGA sponsored events for almost four years now. In fact, except for a kids cache, they haven't even been placed at our last two big events. Individual event hosts may choose to do differently and though we don't log temps, I really don't see why anyone who wants to log them for whatever reason should feel like they've caused offense.

Link to comment

Drama alert!!! The event mentioned by CachinStrattons has zero multiple attended logs.

You spoke too soon.

 

A misunderstanding, I think. :lol: The event they logged 70 some times is not the same event they mention in their post. It was one of those "night before" type events.

As of this morning when I made that post, both event that they show as 'found' have been multi-logged by others, not that I care.
Link to comment

Yep - this event covers the multi find category quite nicely. 36 "will attend" logs and 1,637 (make that 1,666) "attended" logs. Should they go for mega event status, do you think? :rolleyes:

 

I think it's ridiculous to log an event 75+ times for temporary caches. But then I also think it's lazy to just hide temporary event caches. Make 'em permanent and get 'em published so everyone can go look for them. If you want to have the event next year, then archive last year's event caches and publish a new series for the next event.

 

For the first event we hosted in 2007, we put out five permanent caches in the woods around it, and for the next event we hosted there a year later, we added two more. We had to archive four of them over time, the other three caches are still active. Between the two events, we had 33 attendees, but the seven permanent caches we hid in the area have had a total of 737 finds -- the most popular has been found almost 250 times since it was published in October 2007.

 

We recently attended a CITO at a state park, followed by an event cache. The event sponsors worked with the park staff and hid over 100 permanent caches in and around the park. If they had been only temp caches, only the 42 or so folks who attended the event could have logged them, but now they're out there for everyone. That's good for the park, that's good for *ALL* geocachers (not just the ones who made the events), and that's good for the game.

 

(edit to update the "find" count on the event)

That's great, but we need to allow for the fact that others do it differently for many reasons that are their own.
Link to comment

I have a quick question . Im going to an event tomarrow can I log the temp caches as a regular find ?

Have you had your question answered? When I was new at this, I, too, was given that same information that I could claim all of the temps by repeatedly claiming the event. I didn't have any way of knowing that it was something that wasn't done everywhere. I did that at perhaps three events before I stopped. To this day, it is obvious by looking at my stats where it says "has found 356 caches (329 distinct)". Do I walk around with my head hanging down in shame over that? Of course not. But I do wish now that I hadn't. If you have done that, and decide that you'd like to delete the duplicates, do it now rather than after you have important milestone caches that will get messed up.

 

Excellent advice regarding the milestones, never thought of that.

 

I know many people who have posted multiple attends at events who went back and deleted them. That's because (shocking revelation coming), I'm one of them!! Only one extra attended at an event where the host practiced moderation (maybe 4 temporary caches total). I'm guessing I deleted it within a couple of weeks.

 

But yeah, if your relatively new to events, and they tell you at the event to do it, and you see everyone else doing it on the cache page, I imagine you're just going to do it; all with no idea there is any controversy, or that the practice is limited to a small geographic area of the U.S.

 

Definitely excellent advice, and it's true, I had NO IDEA that people did this! Out here we just log our attend, find our temp caches (if there are any), and log any real caches we find, but no one out here logs temp caches AT ALL. Am I bothered that people do it? Not really, but I wouldn't because of stats...

Link to comment

I didnt know it was a big controversy, and I didnt know it wasn't done everywhere. I have been to a couple events where I have logged all the temp caches I have found. I dont feel cheap by doing so, though. Those were caches put out by geocachers, I had to use my GPS to find them, and I had permission to log them from the even coordinator (cache owner). Its fine with me. I DO see how this could be abused into skewing numbers.....and thats really important only if you care about numbers.

Edited by GroveBird
Link to comment

Yep - this event covers the multi find category quite nicely. 36 "will attend" logs and 1,637 (make that 1,666) "attended" logs. Should they go for mega event status, do you think? :rolleyes:

 

I think it's ridiculous to log an event 75+ times for temporary caches. But then I also think it's lazy to just hide temporary event caches. Make 'em permanent and get 'em published so everyone can go look for them. If you want to have the event next year, then archive last year's event caches and publish a new series for the next event.

 

For the first event we hosted in 2007, we put out five permanent caches in the woods around it, and for the next event we hosted there a year later, we added two more. We had to archive four of them over time, the other three caches are still active. Between the two events, we had 33 attendees, but the seven permanent caches we hid in the area have had a total of 737 finds -- the most popular has been found almost 250 times since it was published in October 2007.

 

We recently attended a CITO at a state park, followed by an event cache. The event sponsors worked with the park staff and hid over 100 permanent caches in and around the park. If they had been only temp caches, only the 42 or so folks who attended the event could have logged them, but now they're out there for everyone. That's good for the park, that's good for *ALL* geocachers (not just the ones who made the events), and that's good for the game.

 

(edit to update the "find" count on the event)

That's great, but we need to allow for the fact that others do it differently for many reasons that are their own.

 

Hmm. I looked back through the post for the part where I said that no one should ever, ever, ever do this, upon pain of death.

 

I couldn't find it, but I did see the part where I indicated that I was expressing my personal opinion.

Link to comment

I didnt know it was a big controversy, and I didnt know it wasn't done everywhere. I have been to a couple events where I have logged all the temp caches I have found. I dont feel cheap by doing so, though. Those were caches put out by geocachers, I had to use my GPS to find them, and I had permission to log them from the even coordinator (cache owner). Its fine with me. I DO see how this could be abused into skewing numbers.....and thats really important only if you care about numbers.

But they didn't meet the basic guidelines of this site to be listed on thier own merits. So why use this site's resources to log them?? Might just as well use a competitors site to log them.

Link to comment

Drama alert!!! The event mentioned by CachinStrattons has zero multiple attended logs. This forum thread must have been brought to their attention. Although I see there is a "pre main event" event with 900 some attends. Hey, I only mentioned a Geographic region originally. :anibad:

 

Not sure what you are looking at. The event has so many multi logs it is hard to find the legit ones.

 

But the longstanding Groundspeak policy has been "if the event host allows it", and I don't see that changing.

 

This has never been GS policy as a search of threads over the years will show, in fact, Jeremy has stated that he thinks the practice is, if memory serves, " stupid ".

 

GS longstanding "position" has been that they have better things to arbitrate undesirable logging practices other than those that directly violate the guidelines, such as those containing profanity or arbitrary deletions. As such they have not taken a official stance and let the CO's and local community decide.

 

It is good to see it dying out, although living close to Wisconsin don't really see evidence of this. It can't go away soon enough.

 

EDITED: To add link to Jeremy's comments.

 

Jeremy says he thinks logging an event twice is stupid. He says nothing about logging an event as attended 37 times.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I didnt know it was a big controversy, and I didnt know it wasn't done everywhere. I have been to a couple events where I have logged all the temp caches I have found. I dont feel cheap by doing so, though. Those were caches put out by geocachers, I had to use my GPS to find them, and I had permission to log them from the even coordinator (cache owner). Its fine with me. I DO see how this could be abused into skewing numbers.....and thats really important only if you care about numbers.

But they didn't meet the basic guidelines of this site to be listed on thier own merits. So why use this site's resources to log them?? Might just as well use a competitors site to log them.

 

Thats true. Has Ground speak addressed the issue?

Link to comment

I didnt know it was a big controversy, and I didnt know it wasn't done everywhere. I have been to a couple events where I have logged all the temp caches I have found. I dont feel cheap by doing so, though. Those were caches put out by geocachers, I had to use my GPS to find them, and I had permission to log them from the even coordinator (cache owner). Its fine with me. I DO see how this could be abused into skewing numbers.....and thats really important only if you care about numbers.

But they didn't meet the basic guidelines of this site to be listed on thier own merits. So why use this site's resources to log them?? Might just as well use a competitors site to log them.

 

Thats true. Has Ground speak addressed the issue?

 

Sort of - follow this link - Jeremy is the Owner of Groundspeak.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=99980&st=150&p=1524015entry1524015

Link to comment

All I can say is WOW!

Not to the OP, but from looking about, it seems this is fairly common practice in a particular couple (U.S.) states. Perhaps it is only a local phenomenon.

 

Had noticed as of late, plenty of nØØbs wanting to find out about events. At first I thought they were doing right wanting to learn about geocaching from geocachers. NOW, however, I wonder if they just might want to inflate their find count by 120 - 140 per event attended.

 

I just don't understand, it seems like such an easy concept -- one geocache = one find. What's so difficult about that?

I know, I know -- "But there were temp caches at the event". Problem is, they were never registered (reviewed/published) geocaches. As far as geocaching.com is concerned they never existed, therefore the "find(s)" never existed, nor do they now.

Duhhhhhhhhhhh!

 

There was more, but I <snipped> it. :rolleyes: You are welcome.

 

edit: changed state to states. OMG! It catching on elsewhere.

Edited by Gitchee-Gummee
Link to comment

I didnt know it was a big controversy, and I didnt know it wasn't done everywhere. I have been to a couple events where I have logged all the temp caches I have found. I dont feel cheap by doing so, though. Those were caches put out by geocachers, I had to use my GPS to find them, and I had permission to log them from the even coordinator (cache owner). Its fine with me. I DO see how this could be abused into skewing numbers.....and thats really important only if you care about numbers.

But they didn't meet the basic guidelines of this site to be listed on thier own merits. So why use this site's resources to log them?? Might just as well use a competitors site to log them.

 

Thats true. Has Ground speak addressed the issue?

 

Sort of - follow this link - Jeremy is the Owner of Groundspeak.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=99980&st=150&p=1524015entry1524015

 

So he says its up to the cache owner, but don't abuse it...basically.

Honestly, I DID NOT know this was NOT done elsewhere. I thought thats what you did at these events. After thinking about it for a while...I am going to reconsider doing this. I'm in a club that puts on an event like this...where you log multiple times per "temp cache". I think at our next meeting I will talk about restructuring things.

Edited by GroveBird
Link to comment

Yep - this event covers the multi find category quite nicely. 36 "will attend" logs and 1,637 (make that 1,666) "attended" logs. Should they go for mega event status, do you think? :rolleyes:

 

I think it's ridiculous to log an event 75+ times for temporary caches. But then I also think it's lazy to just hide temporary event caches. Make 'em permanent and get 'em published so everyone can go look for them. If you want to have the event next year, then archive last year's event caches and publish a new series for the next event.

 

For the first event we hosted in 2007, we put out five permanent caches in the woods around it, and for the next event we hosted there a year later, we added two more. We had to archive four of them over time, the other three caches are still active. Between the two events, we had 33 attendees, but the seven permanent caches we hid in the area have had a total of 737 finds -- the most popular has been found almost 250 times since it was published in October 2007.

 

We recently attended a CITO at a state park, followed by an event cache. The event sponsors worked with the park staff and hid over 100 permanent caches in and around the park. If they had been only temp caches, only the 42 or so folks who attended the event could have logged them, but now they're out there for everyone. That's good for the park, that's good for *ALL* geocachers (not just the ones who made the events), and that's good for the game.

 

(edit to update the "find" count on the event)

That's great, but we need to allow for the fact that others do it differently for many reasons that are their own.

 

Hmm. I looked back through the post for the part where I said that no one should ever, ever, ever do this, upon pain of death.

 

I couldn't find it, but I did see the part where I indicated that I was expressing my personal opinion.

Correct. You gave your personal opinion and I offered that other's situations are different than yours. You can choose to use this info to modify your opinion, or not. (Isn't this the basis of internet forums, after all.)

Link to comment

Point of information....the Wisconsin Geocaching Association has not allowed the logging of temporary caches at any WGA sponsored events for almost four years now. In fact, except for a kids cache, they haven't even been placed at our last two big events. Individual event hosts may choose to do differently and though we don't log temps, I really don't see why anyone who wants to log them for whatever reason should feel like they've caused offense.

 

Fahget it! You guys have been off the hook for years. Ohio is the undisputed world champion of temp cache logging. :ph34r:

 

And don't think I'm dissing or hating on Ohio. Because I have the Buckeyes in every bracket I filled out. :lol:

Link to comment

I didnt know it was a big controversy, and I didnt know it wasn't done everywhere. I have been to a couple events where I have logged all the temp caches I have found. I dont feel cheap by doing so, though. Those were caches put out by geocachers, I had to use my GPS to find them, and I had permission to log them from the even coordinator (cache owner). Its fine with me. I DO see how this could be abused into skewing numbers.....and thats really important only if you care about numbers.

But they didn't meet the basic guidelines of this site to be listed on thier own merits. So why use this site's resources to log them?? Might just as well use a competitors site to log them.

 

Thats true. Has Ground speak addressed the issue?

 

Sort of - follow this link - Jeremy is the Owner of Groundspeak.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=99980&st=150&p=1524015entry1524015

 

So he says its up to the cache owner, but don't abuse it...basically.

Honestly, I DID NOT know this was NOT done elsewhere. I thought thats what you did at these events. After thinking about it for a while...I am going to reconsider doing this. I'm in a club that puts on an event like this...where you log multiple times per "temp cache". I think at our next meeting I will talk about restructuring things.

 

...Don't forget the 'stupid' part. ;)B)

Link to comment

Interesting side note -- was just checking out one of the events to see that it had 33 notes (most were "planning to attend" notes; some were "beg off" notes, some were "bug drop" notes), yet it showed 10777 "attended" logs.

 

I had always wondered why/how cachers that had started caching 3 yrs before show nearly 10,000 finds. Now I know.

Link to comment

...Don't forget the 'stupid' part. ;)B)

 

Was that really necessary? <_< Are you implying that I am stupid for doing this in the past?

no no - sorry - please note the sunglasses smilie - just pointing out what I saw as the most telling portion of that link.....

 

Have a donut..... :omnomnom: on me. And milk.

Edited by StarBrand
Link to comment

:D

...Don't forget the 'stupid' part. ;)B)

 

Was that really necessary? <_< Are you implying that I am stupid for doing this in the past?

no no - sorry - please note the sunglasses smilie - just pointing out what I saw as the most telling portion of that link.....

 

Have a donut..... :omnomnom: on me. And milk.

Oooooo Doughnuts!! :laughing: No worries man.

Link to comment
You can choose to use this info to modify your opinion, or not. (Isn't this the basis of internet forums, after all.)

 

Oops. I thought the basis was that I was right, and all of you are wrong, and if I type forcefully enough (or even IN ALL CAPS), I can bend you all to my will.

 

:D

Link to comment

I had always wondered why/how cachers that had started caching 3 yrs before show nearly 10,000 finds. Now I know.

 

Slightly OT, but a buddy of mine back in Germany hit 10k in just under four without doing so (April 2007 - January 2011). He's got a family and a job and everything. (No idea where he finds the time!)

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...
Followers 1
×
×
  • Create New...