+kd7edh Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 Well as you may know this is not a new idea. There are several moving caches out there, and I find them quite fun to find. So I decided to setup my own. Well it got denied because, "caches that have the goal to move, or temporary caches (ex: Caches hidden for events) will not be approved." Well I think they should be approved (and it appears that there are many others who agree with this as well, just do a search for moving caches in the forums). One that I have been after for a while, and is also the one that gave me the idea to create my own is: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=53370 This one seems to be really popular. And as the laws of "Supply and demand" go, I'm asking for a supply to my demand, and the hundreds of other cachers out there who have written... Jeremy, I think to implement these moving caches it would also be beneficial to add a "long/lat moved to" option to these types of caches. That way the person placing the cache in a new location will be able to record without having to have the cache owner update it. Link to comment
+Marky Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 The problem with moving caches has to do with appropriate placement. It is too big of a burden on the approvers to have to approve every new placement of a moving cache. This is the main reason new moving caches are no longer approved. (Temporary caches are not allowed for the same reason. Too much of a burden on the approvers for just a limited time cache.) --Marky "All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer with a backlit GPSr" Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 Another problem with a moving cache is that the owner soon loses the ability to maintain it. Even if it doesn't move out of the owners area they have to face that they may not be able to find it when the time comes to retire the cache, move it out of a sensative area etc. While moving caches are unique they present problmes that are not easily solveable at this time. Link to comment
Keystone Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 See this post by Jeremy, just to be very clear about the site's views on this subject. To add to the list of issues: -- Finder promptly reports new coordinates in log, but owner fails to update cache page, leading to subsequent searchers going to look for a cache that's no longer at the old coordinates. (Admittedly, that could be fixed by implementing the suggestion above... if you REALLY trust any visitor to your cache page to change the cache coordinates.) -- Finder retrieves cache but waits a few weeks before getting around to logging their find online, and providing the new coordinates. In the meantime, several people search for a cache that isn't there. These are actual examples, not theoretical ones. I know that there are existing moving caches that have been successful. There are others which have been problematic. Don't make me stop this car! Link to comment
lowracer Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 Moving caches are fine, all naysaying to the contrary. If you want to post one and can't get any of the listing services to accept it, just deploy it and make a web page for it. Use a free guestbook for the online "logbook" and then email your local group of cachers to start the hunt. You don't even need to update coordinates as they change, because the folks who log it will do that for you, in their log entries. Just put a note saying that the latest coords are posted in the online logs. I have a roving cache called "Rolling Blackout" that's currently listed on aNother caching site right now but it started on my own website. Contrary to the usual comments that moving caches will cause the nuclear meltdown of geocaching as we know it, they're fine. We've got a couple rover caches in Austin right now and they've never been a problem. Never been anything but wildly popular and the most fun you can have geocaching. Now you could argue that all it takes is one bad apple to spoil the whole thing, and you may be right, but that caveat applies to geocaching in general. "The Rock That Rolls" GCCF79 http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=%7BAA4746FA-A6B3-4074-9F33-4F0BD1CBB21A%7D "Rolling Blackout" N008BD (you'll just have to find it yourself, I'm sure the link would be censored) Link to comment
Jomarac5 Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 quote: lowracer wrote:Moving caches are fine, all naysaying to the contrary. I agree. Moving caches are fine and add a positively to the game. They allow newcomers the advantage of being 'coached' by seasoned cachers on how to place caches, etc. They allow some fun competition amongst local cachers. They are self-policed by local cachers. If they are not working properly, then perhaps it is the fault of local cachers. They do work, and should be allowed. ***** Link to comment
Keystone Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 Very interesting description of the cache listed on the other site, since the published position of the admins there in response to the question "Are moving caches allowed?" is "Generally no." And, to their credit, the admins at the other site point to the same reasons being discussed above. I gather that you obtained an exception for your cache in Austin, and I'm glad you all are enjoying it. Don't make me stop this car! Link to comment
lowracer Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 There may be something special about Austin. I hope it continues. Link to comment
+kd7edh Posted October 2, 2003 Author Share Posted October 2, 2003 quote:"Rolling Blackout" N008BD(you'll just have to find it yourself, I'm sure the link would be censored) I'm just curious what the other cache site is. If you would prefere not to post it, can you email it to me? Link to comment
+kd7edh Posted October 2, 2003 Author Share Posted October 2, 2003 Thank goodness for google.com Link to comment
+erik88l-r Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 In a Utopian world with perfectly responsible geocachers moving caches should be fine. In the same world you also wouldn't need cache approvers checking to be sure caches aren't put in places that prohibit caches, too close to RR tracks, etc., etc. Unfortunately we don't live in that world. I live in the imperfect world of Georgia, where our state parks prohibit physical caches unless the park manager approves the location. We have a moving cache in our state. Guess where someone put that moving cache? I'll be charitable and call it a newbie mistake, but that doesn't change the damage that can be done to the sport if that cache is discovered by the park ranger. That is why Jeremy has asked that the admins not approve moving caches. erik - geocaching.com admin Link to comment
+kd7edh Posted October 3, 2003 Author Share Posted October 3, 2003 While I still disagree with this decision, I must respect it. That's the way the game is played. Hopefully one day the many "innovative" ideas that I see posted will be realized... Link to comment
+welch Posted October 3, 2003 Share Posted October 3, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Keystone Approver:Very interesting description of the cache listed on the other site, since the published position of the admins there in response to the question "Are moving caches allowed?" is "Generally no." And, to their credit, the admins at the other site point to the same reasons being discussed above. I gather that you obtained an exception for your cache in Austin, and I'm glad you all are enjoying it. Keystone, I was given the impression that a moving cache would be allowed (on this site), if the problem of placement in approved areas were removed. What I mean is, If I were to get permission from the management for a cache to be moved and the general area was known. (ie: this cache is to be moved, but only along Whatyacallit trail, staying inside the park and with XXX distance of the trail itself) That would be approved wouldn't it? It would still have potential problems, but what cache doesn't... Link to comment
georapper Posted October 3, 2003 Share Posted October 3, 2003 i hid a cache with moving coordinates, not the cache itself moving but the coordinates to the cache moved. what i found is that people don't read directions very well. the coordinates did not move very much, for about every 4 or 5 cachers that found the coordinates, the coordinates were moved to another cache. i don't know what it is about directions, but i find that cachers just don't follow simple directions. Creativity Within The Bounds Of Conformity Link to comment
+Essiar Posted October 7, 2003 Share Posted October 7, 2003 I agree with Lowracer above. The most popular caches in Austin are the 2 moving caches. They have what I would almost call a "cult" following. In the 8 month period that The Rock That Rolls has been active, it has had 315 logs. An incredible amount of fun, never one problem. I do undertand the admins' fears about posting these, on the other hand none of those fears have ever come to fruition here. I can't begin to tell you how many wonderful experiences The Rock has been a catalyst for. I have also had a blast with the newer Rolling Blackout. Yes Lowracer, there IS something special about Austin. Link to comment
+kd7edh Posted October 7, 2003 Author Share Posted October 7, 2003 georapper, I like that idea. I could setup a permenent cache that then points to another location. And these coordinates could be the ones that get updated. It would be a multi cache then, but at least you could have a non stationary ending... Link to comment
+kd7edh Posted October 7, 2003 Author Share Posted October 7, 2003 Even better. I have an idea that would fully be allowed by Geocaching.com. I could have the endpoint of the geocache be the stationary geocache, and then that stationary geocache has directions to check online for the next coordinates to the end cache. Then I could write a script program that users who move the cache can then update. That way there would be no maintenance required by me either. Do you think that this would fly with the admins? Link to comment
+kd7edh Posted October 8, 2003 Author Share Posted October 8, 2003 I have a prototype of the logs up. Tell me what you think. http://home.pcgamerscantina.com/geocaching/gc0001 Link to comment
+kd7edh Posted October 8, 2003 Author Share Posted October 8, 2003 Just in case the DNS hasn't propogated to your system, use this link: http://12.209.149.19/geocaching/gc0001 Link to comment
+Mopar Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 quote:Originally posted by kd7edh: Do you think that this would fly with the admins? Probably not, since they would still not be approving the location, and since currently you cant change the coords more then a few hundred feet anyway. The script would have to somehow unapprove the cache, and submit it for approval each time it moved, and the approvers would have to manually update your caches coords. Since the main reason moving caches are no longer allowed is because there is no way to ensure the cache is moved legally each time, how does your script change anything? "This is gc.com, love it or leave it " Link to comment
+ShaneN4Girls Posted October 8, 2003 Share Posted October 8, 2003 I have two "moving" caches on my watch list , one of which I drove a total of 420 miles in a day to grab. These 2 caches generate more e-mail hits than any other on my list. I can see admins point of view about placement, but then I'm one that believes that sometimes their views are a little narrow minded. I know there are some idiots out there who would put one of these between 2 railroad tracks, but I also know that the people who hunt these are not usually newbies, and are aware of the "dangers" of geocaching. Letigious (spelling?) societies suck. Have fun and take responsibility for yourself. That is all... P.S. - Admins, please don't archive the moving caches already out in the world. I'd love to have another day long adventure grabbing one again. "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose."- Jim Elliot Link to comment
+kd7edh Posted October 8, 2003 Author Share Posted October 8, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Mopar:Probably not, since they would still not be approving the location, and since currently you cant change the coords more then a few hundred feet anyway. The script would have to somehow unapprove the cache, and submit it for approval each time it moved, and the approvers would have to manually update your caches coords. Since the main reason moving caches are no longer allowed is because there is no way to ensure the cache is moved legally each time, how does your script change anything? + _"This is gc.com, love it or leave it "_ The reason is, that the geocaching portion would be stationary. The cache would have a paper with the web address to my log page I have listed above. At this point it is now in the hands of my site and not geocaching. That is why... Link to comment
+Mopar Posted October 9, 2003 Share Posted October 9, 2003 quote:Originally posted by kd7edh:The reason is, that the geocaching portion would be stationary. The cache would have a paper with the web address to my log page I have listed above. At this point it is now in the hands of my site and not geocaching. That is why... And again, I ask: quote:Originally posted by Mopar:Since the main reason moving caches are no longer allowed is because there is no way to ensure the cache is moved legally each time, how does your script change anything? "This is gc.com, love it or leave it " Link to comment
+erik88l-r Posted October 9, 2003 Share Posted October 9, 2003 quote: Since the main reason moving caches are no longer allowed is because there is no way to ensure the cache is moved legally each time, how does your script change anything? I've gotta second that. The park ranger, RR police, property owner, etc. doesn't care if the geocache that was illegally placed is listed on geocaching.com or on someone else's website. Either way it can give our sport a black eye. ~erik~ Link to comment
BassoonPilot Posted October 9, 2003 Share Posted October 9, 2003 quote:Originally posted by ~erik~:The park ranger, RR police, property owner, etc. doesn't care if the geocache that was illegally placed is listed on geocaching.com or on someone else's website. Since when are "illegally placed" and "placed without permission" one and the same? Good luck to the approvers when they are required to verify that permission to place a cache has been secured prior to every approval. Link to comment
+kd7edh Posted October 9, 2003 Author Share Posted October 9, 2003 I don't mean that the geocache cache itself will move. It will remain stationary in an approved location. Up to this point and only this point will it be a geocache. The location, position, and purpose would be constant. Non changing, and there should be no problem approving it. It would be infact just an ordinary everyday cache in every aspect. What I am proposing is this an object that I could place into ANY exising cachge. For example, I could walk up to cache GCXXXXXX and place this object that says "take up a challenge and find the sister object, for coordinates please see this web site (http://something.com)". The sister object's location would then be recorded on my site and not geocache.com. Does this make sense? Basically I no longer asking about a moving "geocache" because I know far to well that this will never get approved. This would be an extenstion, or it doesn't even have to be. I could even take said object and place it in the middle of no where. There doesn't even have to be a connection with geocaching.com... So what my question is, and really this is only to those who do enjoy the moving cache, is if this would be something that a "moving cache hunter" would be interested in seaking? Link to comment
BassoonPilot Posted October 9, 2003 Share Posted October 9, 2003 quote:Originally posted by kd7edh: What I am proposing is this an object that I could place into ANY exising cachge. For example, I could walk up to cache GCXXXXXX and place this object that says "take up a challenge and find the sister object, There is a cache in Germany where someone did that by putting elements of the coordinates on travel bugs he released. The problem has been that the travel bugs, which were to remain local, soon traveled far and wide ... my daughter picked up one of the TBs in NY or NJ, and soon began receiving requests for the clue information on the tag. NJ Geocacher "Mr. Magoo" has also used a travel bug as the "key" to his "Magoo's Motors" cache. You might want to contact him for his impressions and opinions. Link to comment
+kd7edh Posted October 9, 2003 Author Share Posted October 9, 2003 BassoonPilot, I did a quick search, and I am assuming this is the cache you were refering to: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=eda66779-acb9-4506-a09c-b84ab6ba8e67 I have emailed him. Thanks for the suggestion. Link to comment
+Essiar Posted October 9, 2003 Share Posted October 9, 2003 318 logs in 8 months. That's averaging more than one log per day for the past approx. 250 consecutive days. An incredible amount of fun. Never one problem. The Rock That Rolls. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=aa4746fa-a6b3-4074-9f33-4f0bd1cbb21a Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted October 9, 2003 Share Posted October 9, 2003 If you want the ability to place caches in parks you will have to give up moving caches for reasons already stated. The risk is to lose many more traditional caches than the few moving caches. There are exceptions to this that can be figured out. One might be a moving cache that moves from cache to cache since the caches it moves to are already approved per the rules. The owner will still soon lose thier ability to maintain the cache. Link to comment
Recommended Posts