Verifying a Find Poll

[+Smokehouse]

I think that on the inside of the Cache box you should write a 4 digit number. The person who finds that cache must write that number down and enter it into the found log as a way of verifying the find.

 

This would be a fairly simple thing to set up. A 4 digit field is entered when the cache is first hidden, that same 4 digit field is used to verify a find, and only these can be use to accumultate a total so that you can get a pin or something by your name later on.

 

The KGB

[+mrcpu]

I've been working on a verification system in my spare time. I would love to see one integrated into the site. A simple solution would be the suggestion made for virtual caches where the user needs a password to post their FOUND entry.

 

With a virtual the owner would email the password to the finder. With a regular cache the owner would print the password in the front of the log book.

 

A password would be easier to remember and more fun then a number too.

 

Rob

Mobile Cache Command

[+Web-ling]

Might not be a bad OPTIONAL feature. I wouldn't want to see it on all caches. How would it work with existing caches? Would every existing cache have to have a password assigned?

 

[+Broken Wing]

I hate to see things get too complicated, with verifications and reverifications, passwords and so on. More and more "rules" would seem to make the whole idea less inviting.

 

If people want to cheat on finds, then they ought to see a doctor.

[+Tedoca]

I didn't vote but like the idea of a cache hider having the option of assigning a password to a cache (virtual or actual). The password could simply be written on the inside lid of the container, or obtained through clues at the cache site, and would be required to post a "found-it" log entry. Personally, I would use it on all of my caches. I don't think it really over complicates anything... but it does ensure that folks logging a find on your cache did indeed actually find the cache. In fact, to me, having to find, or deduce from clues, a password in order to log a find only adds a new dimension to the game... think of the possibilities!

 

Regards,

Tedoca

 

[LazyLeopard]

I concocted a sort-of password system for my virtual cache Inbound from Proxima (Kent) because I wanted a distinct and separate log book that wasn't integral to geocaching.com. It's probably trivially crackable, but it gets round any argument...

 

Purrs... LazyLeopard http://www.lazyleopard.org.uk

[+rdw]

Perhaps my attitude towards geocaching is maturing, because my answer now is different than what it would have been before. My answer now is that verification might be used for virtuals at the cacher's discretion. I used to care about my find count alot more. I was in a race for numbers. Maybe I was only racing myself, but I was certainly racing. Lately, I have not been concerned about getting to a cache first or logging as many finds as possible in a day. I can feel myself moving from quantity towards quality. The point is that the numbers aren't that important. If people want to log finds without finding it, that is up to them. I feel sorry for anyone who is so desperate that they will take advantage of geocaching's unsupervised nature. Let's not impose any more rules on our wonderful sport/hobby/activity.

 

Boy, that turned into philosophical rambling. Point: I voted for "I don't think verification really matters." People who log fake finds will find a way even with verification. Required verification would be an annoyance, particularly if you find a number of caches in one day. As long as it's not required, I guess I don't mind.

 

rdw

[+rdw]

Perhaps my attitude towards geocaching is maturing, because my answer now is different than what it would have been before. My answer now is that verification might be used for virtuals at the cacher's discretion. I used to care about my find count alot more. I was in a race for numbers. Maybe I was only racing myself, but I was certainly racing. Lately, I have not been concerned about getting to a cache first or logging as many finds as possible in a day. I can feel myself moving from quantity towards quality. The point is that the numbers aren't that important. If people want to log finds without finding it, that is up to them. I feel sorry for anyone who is so desperate that they will take advantage of geocaching's unsupervised nature. Let's not impose any more rules on our wonderful sport/hobby/activity.

 

Boy, that turned into philosophical rambling. Point: I voted for "I don't think verification really matters." People who log fake finds will find a way even with verification. Required verification would be an annoyance, particularly if you find a number of caches in one day. As long as it's not required, I guess I don't mind.

 

rdw

[+Hawk-eye]

quote:

---

Originally posted by rdw:

....Boy, that turned into philosophical rambling. Point: I voted for "I don't think verification really matters." People who log fake finds will find a way even with verification. Required verification would be an annoyance, particularly if you find a number of caches in one day. As long as it's not required, I guess I don't mind.

 

rdw

---

 

Well said and covers the point from my perspective as well.

 

[+Doodad]

I would love to see some type of verification, but only on caches that the chache owner chooses. I have been toying with setting up a multiple virtual cache around town but would like a way to verify the find without alot of work.

 

For most caches I don't feel it would be necessary. I would hate to be the new cacher that just hiked 5 miles and did not realize they had to get the code to log the cache.

[+martinp13]

I would love to see password-required logging available. Of course you wouldn't HAVE to use it, but it would be nice for virtuals and some micros. And it would save a lot of extra work people go thru to log some caches: I did the Disney DCA and Legoland caches on the road, so I had to download the achievement file, download a Word viewer since I didn't have it on the laptop, unlock the document with the password and read it, then post my log with the appropriate codeword. Would have been much easier to just use the password to log my find!

 

> Martin (Magellan 330)

Don't have time to program and record your shows while geocaching? Get a TiVo!

[+Web-ling]

How about making the optional password feature available on caches owned by Charter Members? Not MO caches, but any cache owned by a Charter Member. Might make a nice little "perk."

 

[+inceptor]

If someone is going to cheat, they will cheat. Make it harder and they will find ways around it. By making it harder all you are doing is complicating this sport for those of us who like the ease.

[LazyLeopard]

quote:

---

By making it harder all you are doing is complicating this sport for those of us who like the ease.

---

For some types of cache (in particular virtual ones) it could be a useful option that would make things easier. No more messing about with emails to the cache owner (who may or may not respond) and so on. All the verification could be done in one place.

 

Purrs... LazyLeopard http://www.lazyleopard.org.uk

[LazyLeopard]

quote:

---

By making it harder all you are doing is complicating this sport for those of us who like the ease.

---

For some types of cache (in particular virtual ones) it could be a useful option that would make things easier. No more messing about with emails to the cache owner (who may or may not respond) and so on. All the verification could be done in one place.

 

Purrs... LazyLeopard http://www.lazyleopard.org.uk

[Max PDOP]

I think the paper log is verification enough for actual caches. I just would like a password verfication for virtuals.