+supertbone Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Do it once, and perhaps you are merely giving a gift to the community in the way of being able to log more than one cache within 528'. Do it repeatedly and perhaps you are trying to game the system and do an end around of the saturation guideline. Who's to say which is which in this particular case. Either way, I still wouldn't care. You seem to care enough to tell us, at least twice, how much you don't care. I do care though. I think there are good reasons for the proximity rule, and if it's nullified by people gaming the system, I see that as something harmful to geocaching. Well said. To answer the OP: this exact same situation temporarily migrated to North San Diego County for a few years. I spent some time working in SLC; coming home to cache the same geo-trash was frustration writ large. I always wanted a PQ filter to ignore all hides by that UID. By definition, 2500 caches are all trash. If you can't or won't maintain them, they're trash. There are hundreds of cachers who want to create that something special cache but simply cannot because of a rolling mass of crap that archives itself and is reborn periodically as more crap. Finding and correcting one out of the lot after a whack of forum posts is not a confidence builder in the reviewer community or process but a confirmation that they only have time to address issues when they are specifically raised. Shame won't work in this specific case but I think it's the right tool most of the time. The caches are only meant to be found by a small number of cachers in any event, not the community at large, so appealing to the greater good and all that jazz is not likely to work. Boy, you are a fount of positivity this morning. Who are you call all of someone's caches trash, especially when you have only a small hand full of his caches? Quote Link to comment
+peterkraatz Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 Do it once, and perhaps you are merely giving a gift to the community in the way of being able to log more than one cache within 528'. Do it repeatedly and perhaps you are trying to game the system and do an end around of the saturation guideline. Who's to say which is which in this particular case. Either way, I still wouldn't care. You seem to care enough to tell us, at least twice, how much you don't care. I do care though. I think there are good reasons for the proximity rule, and if it's nullified by people gaming the system, I see that as something harmful to geocaching. Well said. To answer the OP: this exact same situation temporarily migrated to North San Diego County for a few years. I spent some time working in SLC; coming home to cache the same geo-trash was frustration writ large. I always wanted a PQ filter to ignore all hides by that UID. By definition, 2500 caches are all trash. If you can't or won't maintain them, they're trash. There are hundreds of cachers who want to create that something special cache but simply cannot because of a rolling mass of crap that archives itself and is reborn periodically as more crap. Finding and correcting one out of the lot after a whack of forum posts is not a confidence builder in the reviewer community or process but a confirmation that they only have time to address issues when they are specifically raised. Shame won't work in this specific case but I think it's the right tool most of the time. The caches are only meant to be found by a small number of cachers in any event, not the community at large, so appealing to the greater good and all that jazz is not likely to work. Boy, you are a fount of positivity this morning. Who are you call all of someone's caches trash, especially when you have only a small hand full of his caches? Successful troll is successful. My sample size of actual finds, coupled with my extensive use of the same profile information you obviously used to find me answers the question: I'm a guy who's actually looked at them. The good ones get just as much attention as the rest: 1/2500th of all available time. Why do you think I only have a small handful of these finds? Wait for it. It will come to you eventually. I really need to enable reply notification. Fixed. Sorry for the original drive by... Quote Link to comment
+cx1 Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 Not saying that is here, but I think folks are implying that someone could game the system by leaving archived caches there and advertising them as a way to increase # of finds for other folks who want high numbers in less time and increasing the # of finds on his caches. Am not saying that is the exact situation here, but just stating the possibility for cause for concern...gaming the system in order for number hungry folks to even get more in less time. And this effects what? The check Groundspeak sends the person with highest find count? The world famous 'fastest to 100 finds in a day award'? The highest find count of a cache trophy? Seriously even if what you say is 100% true and people are 'gaming' the system, what does it matter and why should it effect how you play the game? The only competition in this game is competition you choose to have, no competition is required to simply play. Quote Link to comment
AZcachemeister Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 Not saying that is here, but I think folks are implying that someone could game the system by leaving archived caches there and advertising them as a way to increase # of finds for other folks who want high numbers in less time and increasing the # of finds on his caches. Am not saying that is the exact situation here, but just stating the possibility for cause for concern...gaming the system in order for number hungry folks to even get more in less time. And this effects what? The check Groundspeak sends the person with highest find count? The world famous 'fastest to 100 finds in a day award'? The highest find count of a cache trophy? Seriously even if what you say is 100% true and people are 'gaming' the system, what does it matter and why should it effect how you play the game? The only competition in this game is competition you choose to have, no competition is required to simply play. To the same extent that logging 1000 finds on your own cache is acceptable. Quote Link to comment
+John in Valley Forge Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 Not saying that is here, but I think folks are implying that someone could game the system by leaving archived caches there and advertising them as a way to increase # of finds for other folks who want high numbers in less time and increasing the # of finds on his caches. Am not saying that is the exact situation here, but just stating the possibility for cause for concern...gaming the system in order for number hungry folks to even get more in less time. And this effects what? The check Groundspeak sends the person with highest find count? The world famous 'fastest to 100 finds in a day award'? The highest find count of a cache trophy? Seriously even if what you say is 100% true and people are 'gaming' the system, what does it matter and why should it effect how you play the game? The only competition in this game is competition you choose to have, no competition is required to simply play. It effects the local cacher that is interested in placing a few caches and maintaining them but cannot. It effects the sensibilities of some non-local cachers who like that there are very few hard and fast rules, respect the few that are in place and don't like to see them flaunted. Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 We had a couple in my area a few years ago that hid the first of what we now call power trails. They were new, and they used some pretty poor containers, and also hid a few on private property without permission. They were terrible at taking constructive criticism (from me and from several others that tried to be gentle with them). They eventually left the area without cleaning up their caches, which are slowly being archived, sometimes removed, sometimes not. They are now in Colorado, and I hope they are reading this message, because they really littered this place. Quote Link to comment
+zoltig Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 We had a couple in my area a few years ago that hid the first of what we now call power trails. <snip> They are now in Colorado, <snip> Thanks...Thanks a bunch. Quote Link to comment
+peterkraatz Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 We had a couple in my area a few years ago that hid the first of what we now call power trails. <snip> They are now in Colorado, <snip> Thanks...Thanks a bunch. I lol'd. Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 We had a couple in my area a few years ago that hid the first of what we now call power trails. <snip> They are now in Colorado, <snip> Thanks...Thanks a bunch. I lol'd. I rolf'd Quote Link to comment
+Ecylram Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 We had a couple in my area a few years ago that hid the first of what we now call power trails. <snip> They are now in Colorado, <snip> Thanks...Thanks a bunch. LOL! I shouldn't be laughing as I live in Colorado, but...'I don't care who you are, that's some funny stuff right there." Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 I STILL don't see why I should care. You shouldn't. Rules obviously don't mean that much to you. No biggie. For those who do like rules, perhaps you could relax enough to let them care? After all, my caring about the rules isn't causing you any harm, is it? Quote Link to comment
+TomToad Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 (edited) Despite your response, I'm still not sure why people are upset about this. Whether or not someone logs an archived cache has zero effect on me and how I play this game. So why should I care? well, in theory, and not necessarily the case here, lets say you have 100 caches on a trail. You want more there but cant list them. You archive 50 of them, and then place 50 more in between them all and tell your friends who like padding their numbers that there is a cache every 260 feet and not every 528 feet for a certain part of it. Thus folks for one little power trail of 52800 feet can get 150 caches and not 100. And then when the land manager, who was assured that there would be 528 feet between caches, finds them at 260 feet instead, all plastered with Geocaching.com stickers, how do you think the game will look to them then? 90% of the guidelines were created to show land managers that geocachers are responsible people. 10% are for controlling the game directly. ( Yes, the 90% and 10% are made-up numbers, but the concept is the same). The guidelines were created for a reason. Attempting to circumvent them will impact the game one way or another. Yes, there are exceptions, but the exceptions should be determined by the reviewers and Groundspeak who are familiar with the situations of the area, not by those who commonly think that hiding a cache within 400' should be an exception because one is a nano and the other is a regular. Edited to put lamoracke's quote in proper context. Edited July 30, 2011 by TomToad Quote Link to comment
+supertbone Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 (edited) _ Edited July 30, 2011 by supertbone Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.