You might not be into numbers if...

[+larryc43230]

Here's a question, how many times does one have to visit cacherstats.com before you could say numbers matter?

I no longer bother with that Web site or others like them. Before the proliferation of LPCs and power trails, my find counts tended to keep up with or exceed those of most other cachers, without my even trying to compete. I was simply out caching a lot. Now that it's so easy to get thousands of finds simply by driving into parking lots and cruising down a highway stopping every couple of minutes, as far as I'm concerned caching statistics are even more meaningless than they once were, in regard to comparing my "performance" with someone else's.

 

Since I dislike LPCs and have exactly no interest in power trails, the rest of the caching world has left me behind, and I'm quite content with that. I'd rather do what I enjoy rather than try to keep up with some sort of competition that has no meaning for me.

 

On the other hand, like a lot of other cachers, I enjoy keeping track of my caching stats and I have tons of them listed in my profile. I just no longer consider it at all meaningful to compare my stats with anyone else's.

 

--Larry

[+Planet]

Someone asked me in another thread, if numbers aren't important, then explain the "cached in 16 states" line under my avatar. That's easy. Places I've been are important to me.

I'm so behind in logging my finds, it's not funny.

 

I started to follow up on that post this morning but ran out of time before I had to go to work. I've found caches in 22 states (and 13 countries). In 12 of those states I've found 3 or fewer caches. As you said, places are important. How many caches I find in those places, not so much.

 

And pointing out how many places you've been at every opportunity means nothing either? Right?

 

Nope, or I would have mentioned other countries, too. And, dude, it's a sig line I have had since 2005. If it bothers you, would you like me to change it? I hit those states because I had to go to FL to take Mom to the hospital for a week of testing, to see if they could find the cause for her seizures. I drove, picking up two in each along the way, and that's how I got those states. I wasn't aiming for them, and haven't been south of PA since.

The 16 states is a reminder of that trip, where I went, and what we went through.

[Clan Riffster]

If it bothers you...

Something I've noticed over the years I've played in here is, there are a certain handful of cachers who absolutely love being offended. So much so, that they'll willingly take offense at the most innocuous post, just to have something to rant against. If you ever do opt to change your signature line, I wouldn't do it to satisfy those few, as they will simply lurk in the shadows, waiting to pounce on the next innocent comment.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

When challenges first came out I did the kiss the frog one in my bathroom, when I found it added to my cache total I quickly deleted it. Just curious how many did something similar or at least banned challenges for that reason.

 

If you did then it is about the numbers.

 

I disagree. If you really don't care about the numbers then it doesn't really matter if a challenge added to your find count or it didn't.

[+Planet]

If it bothers you...

Something I've noticed over the years I've played in here is, there are a certain handful of cachers who absolutely love being offended. So much so, that they'll willingly take offense at the most innocuous post, just to have something to rant against. If you ever do opt to change your signature line, I wouldn't do it to satisfy those few, as they will simply lurk in the shadows, waiting to pounce on the next innocent comment.

 

Yes, but see, I like to paddle, and I paddle in NY a lot, I even have a paddle cache in NY, so I want to stay friendly with someone else who does too! Just in case we meet someday, you know? I wouldn't want an innocuous forum post to come between us. We might actually get along quite well in real life.

I plan in paddling the St. Regis and Raquette Rivers again this year sometime.

I do count the places I've paddled each year, LOL. But only since I got the new kayak.

 

Edit: OOPS, trying to stay on friendly terms with a different poster! I'm not much into Jumping. My knees can't take it anymore, but I used to have fun on the trampoline, LOL!

Edited February 3, 2012 by Planet

[+L0ne.R]

Here's a question, how many times does one have to visit catcherstats.com before you could say numbers matter?

I never even heard of that.

 

Take the T out and have a look, it ranks all cachers with over 200 finds in the world or based on country or state.

 

I'm ranked 22735 in the word but moved up almost 1000 today.

 

I'd say you're into the numbers if your caching goal is move up a leaderboard.

[+Stargazer22]

I've done most of the items on your list and am definitely not into numbers.

For me it's all about the fun and the cool places to go.

Here's another one for you:

 

If you have found more than 30 caches, signed your name in the phyiscal logbook, but never logged them on the website. You might not be into numbers.

[+L0ne.R]

If Groundspeak did away with all stats would you still cache?

Without a doubt!

 

Same here. Wish there was an option to hide my find count but people need to see the count to judge my worthiness.

[+Legochugglers]

This discussion brings to mind an old proverb (amended slightly) that I often repeat to my children.

 

"For When the One Great Cacher

comes to 'log' against your name,

He writes – not that you Won or Lost

but How You Played the Game."

 

[+Doctroid]

Here's a question, how many times does one have to visit catcherstats.com before you could say numbers matter?

I never even heard of that.

 

Take the T out and have a look, it ranks all cachers with over 200 finds in the world or based on country or state.

 

Oh, hey, I got my 200th at the end of December... that means I'm on cacherstats.com now? WOO-HOO!! Excellent! Oh, wait, I don't care. Never mind!

[+L0ne.R]

If you like the numbers game, more power to you. Do what you can to increase them and enjoy sharing that with others that like the numbers.

 

I'm OK with that as long as it doesn't affect the game in a negative way (especially when it comes to hiding caches).

• I don't like seeing bragging posts on the site about finding the most numbers of caches in a day and encouraging others to try to beat that record.
• People who like numbers will take over miles of foot trails planting cheap non-watertight containers every .1 miles leaving no room for organic growth of different cache types, cache styles, and cache sizes by different COs.
• Power trails also encourage the use of cut & paste logs, and acronym logs, which spills into other caches that deserve more then a TFTC.
  • Power trails consume good caches that were placed on the trail prior to PTs - those caches that use to get longer meaningful comments now get TFTC or #56 of 300.

  [*]PTs encourage the "throw down" because often COs can't keep up with the maintenance issues and finders really want their smiley.

So numbers are fine if people made it a personal thing and not have it affect the whole game.

 

 

Edited February 3, 2012 by Solitario R

[+buttaskotch]

I guess I am not into numbers....I still have about 2600 caches to log.....

[Clan Riffster]

If you have found more than 30 caches, signed your name in the phyiscal logbook, but never logged them on the website. You might not be into numbers.

Great addition to the list, Jerry. I long ago lost track of the caches I've located but never logged online. When asked to guess, I say, "Several dozen". 30? 50? 100? I honestly have no clue. I've adhered to that practice too long to make any kind of reasonable estimate.

[+doug_hollyNKC]

I guess I'm probably on the numbers side, but with that being said the group of my friends I go with a lot we usually mix it up. One day we'll go to a new park and aim for 25 plus or so. Another day we'll aim for a conservation area out in the middle of no where with some good d/t caches in it and may only get 5 or 10, but all were quality hikes that we were looking for.

 

One time I'll be in it for total number of finds.

One time I'll be in it for big numbers on difficulty.

and another I might be in for big numbers on terrain.

And most certainly in it for caches that are getting high numbers of favorites.

[+lamoracke]

I've done most of the items on your list and am definitely not into numbers.

For me it's all about the fun and the cool places to go.

Here's another one for you:

 

If you have found more than 30 caches, signed your name in the phyiscal logbook, but never logged them on the website. You might not be into numbers.

 

or if you are one of these people, maybe you do not log them because you believe others are stalking you.

[+Moose Mob]

When driving down the highway, have you noticed that folks slower than you traffic needs to try harder and the faster drivers are insane and needs to slow down to enjoy the drive and/or be safer.

 

It's perspective... number are the same way.

[+Legochugglers]

Have you spent a day of caching with other cachers even though you've already found all or most of the caches on their agenda?

If yes you might not be into numbers.

No, never, except when I was doing a maintenance circuit of some of our own caches with a friend who hadn't done them before.

 

Have you ever stopped in a parking lot or rest area and noticed a cache less than 200 feet away chose not to hunt it even though you were not pressed for time?

If yes you might not be into numbers.

No, I have always been drawn to have a look.

 

Have you ever accidentally walked right past a cache and decided not to go back for it even though it wasn't far?

If yes you might not be into numbers.

No, I believe I have always found a way to go back even if its later that day or a few days later.

 

Do you have one or more caches within a mile of your home that you have no desire to find?

If yes you might not be into numbers.

No again as I have been a dedicated 'slave to a radius' and enjoyed every minute of it.

 

Have you ever driven or walked up to within 100 feet of a cache and realized it was not the sort of cache you enjoy and continued on your way without making an attempt to find it?

If so you may not be into numbers.

Never, however I may include in my subsequent log why I may not have enjoyed that particular place.

 

Have you ever found just a few cache in a park but left the rest unfound because you had seen enough of the park?

If yes, you might not be into numbers.

I have to say that I will generally hunt till I drop.

 

When someone asks about your find count do you usually have to look at your profile because you don't remember it?

If yes you might not be into numbers.

I could tell you within about 20 so I guess this could be construed as a no.

 

Do "milestone" finds like 100th, 500th, 1,000th have no meaning to you?

If so you might not be into numbers.

I am a little bit competetive so I have to admit enjoying milestones and have teed up specific caches/walks as milestone finds. Although not really many milestones in our case.

 

Is finding 5-10 caches in a day your idea of "power caching"?

If yes then you might not be into numbers.

No, 5-10 is a good day out/nice walk with the family and dog or an explore of a new area to us.

 

Would you rather spend 5 hours hunting 1 cache than 1 hour finding 5 caches?

If yes, you might not be into numbers.

I will regularly do both of the above however I would maybe pick up a couple of 'cache and dash's' on the way to the 5 hour hunt!!

 

Do you enjoy multi caches and really don't think about only getting one find for multiple stages?

If yes you might not be into numbers.

Yipeee, Yes, I definately dont worry about no additional smilies for the multiple stages.

 

Have you ever been on a group hunt and not logged a find on a cache because you didn't feel that you contributed enough to the hunt?

If yes, you might not be into numbers.

Never really been part of a group hunt but would never decline to sign the log if I was.

 

Have you attended an event in a cache rich park, but left without single find because being off hunting caches would have interfered with socializing?

If you have you might not be into numbers.

I hope I would find a way to pick up as many caches and do plenty of socializing.

 

Have you done only 3-4 caches and called it a day on a 100+ cache power trail?

If you have you might not be into numbers.

We have never done a 'power trail' of that magnitude however I cant remember ever not completing a trail of 15/20 caches that we set off to do.

 

A lot of no's in my answers which would suggest I might be into numbers although I couldnt answer the question 'Do you know how many finds you have?'. Maybe I'm just too honest but as long as I'm having fun and not upsetting anybody else my question is DOES IT MATTER?. Of course not.

[+DadOf6Furrballs]

Yea, I admit. I'm into numbers. I'm into statistics. However, I'm not obsessed by any means. I'm only concerned about our own, and really don't get into comparing ours against anyone else. It doesn't matter if someone else has 12 finds, or 120,000 finds. The wife and I cache to have fun, whether that is a cool historic spot in the middle of nowhere, or putting the hammer down and getting a bunch in a row on a PT. The key is... we have a great time together. And that's what matters.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

If you have found more than 30 caches, signed your name in the phyiscal logbook, but never logged them on the website. You might not be into numbers.

Great addition to the list, Jerry. I long ago lost track of the caches I've located but never logged online. When asked to guess, I say, "Several dozen". 30? 50? 100? I honestly have no clue. I've adhered to that practice too long to make any kind of reasonable estimate.

 

If you found caches and have not logged the finds online, and when asked "how many", and you have not clue, then,

You might not be into numbers.

 

I don't think a specific number for total number of finds, caches in a day, etc. is an accurate indicator for whether one is into the numbers. There are just two many variables which can influence the raw number to make it meaningful.

Edited February 3, 2012 by NYPaddleCacher

[+the4dirtydogs]

We're in it for the numbers. Totally for the numbers and nothing but numbers. Always about the numbers. Everytime we leave the house it's about the numbers. We like caching! Numbers to us mean we actually get out and play the game. Come on 10,000 finds.

[+Manville Possum]

I know of some big numbers cachers, but seems they never sign any logs on the caches they find?

[+Planet]

Wait!

I just thought of the number that is VERY important to me, when it comes to caching, and it's a number I do want to add to.

I am very happy with the number of friends I've made, that I never would have made, had it not been for caching.

C'mon 10,000 friends!

[+the4dirtydogs]

Wait!

I just thought of the number that is VERY important to me, when it comes to caching, and it's a number I do want to add to.

I am very happy with the number of friends I've made, that I never would have made, had it not been for caching.

C'mon 10,000 friends!

Totally agree on this one too! .

[Trinity's Crew]

You MIGHT be INTO numbers if you regularly post in the "Found it = Didn't find it" thread.

 

11/21/2011

 

#598 - Does finding only a zip-tie count? Of course. I should have expected as much. I'm so glad I didn't save this one for my 600th. Not exactly a cacher's field of dreams with all the poorly-maintained caches here.

 

 

05/25/2011

 

Found thehave enough caches under your belt. setup for the cache, and snapped a photo but the cache itself is gone. I searched the ground for the container but no luck. If co requires I'll email the photo.

 

You either care about numbers or you don't. I suspect Briansnat cares about the numbers more than he lets on. Maybe not his own, but he gets a little bent at people who ARE in it for the numbers. Just a little tiny bit bent. I'm not suggesting he loses sleep over it.

 

And for the record, I have cached off and on for 11 years with less than 200 finds. I mention this because, while numbers "don't matter", a lot of forum members check your stats and dismiss you as irrelevant if you don't eat, sleep, and breathe caching.

[+the4dirtydogs]

You MIGHT be INTO numbers if you regularly post in the "Found it = Didn't find it" thread.

 

11/21/2011

 

#598 - Does finding only a zip-tie count? Of course. I should have expected as much. I'm so glad I didn't save this one for my 600th. Not exactly a cacher's field of dreams with all the poorly-maintained caches here.

 

 

05/25/2011

 

Found thehave enough caches under your belt. setup for the cache, and snapped a photo but the cache itself is gone. I searched the ground for the container but no luck. If co requires I'll email the photo.

 

You either care about numbers or you don't. I suspect Briansnat cares about the numbers more than he lets on. Maybe not his own, but he gets a little bent at people who ARE in it for the numbers. Just a little tiny bit bent. I'm not suggesting he loses sleep over it.

 

And for the record, I have cached off and on for 11 years with less than 200 finds. I mention this because, while numbers "don't matter", a lot of forum members check your stats and dismiss you as irrelevant if you don't eat, sleep, and breathe caching.

DOH! Guess he's in it for the numbers.

 

Or is it You might not be into numbers if... you claim a DNF for finding a zip tie.

 

Nice catch. LMAO

[+Totem Clan]

You MIGHT be INTO numbers if you regularly post in the "Found it = Didn't find it" thread.

 

11/21/2011

 

#598 - Does finding only a zip-tie count? Of course. I should have expected as much. I'm so glad I didn't save this one for my 600th. Not exactly a cacher's field of dreams with all the poorly-maintained caches here.

 

 

05/25/2011

 

Found thehave enough caches under your belt. setup for the cache, and snapped a photo but the cache itself is gone. I searched the ground for the container but no luck. If co requires I'll email the photo.

 

You either care about numbers or you don't. I suspect Briansnat cares about the numbers more than he lets on. Maybe not his own, but he gets a little bent at people who ARE in it for the numbers. Just a little tiny bit bent. I'm not suggesting he loses sleep over it.

 

And for the record, I have cached off and on for 11 years with less than 200 finds. I mention this because, while numbers "don't matter", a lot of forum members check your stats and dismiss you as irrelevant if you don't eat, sleep, and breathe caching.

DOH! Guess he's in it for the numbers.

 

Or is it You might not be into numbers if... you claim a DNF for finding a zip tie.

 

Nice catch. LMAO

That's not his log. That's just a quote from an earlier post about another cacher's log.

[Trinity's Crew]

You MIGHT be INTO numbers if you regularly post in the "Found it = Didn't find it" thread.

 

11/21/2011

 

#598 - Does finding only a zip-tie count? Of course. I should have expected as much. I'm so glad I didn't save this one for my 600th. Not exactly a cacher's field of dreams with all the poorly-maintained caches here.

 

 

05/25/2011

 

Found thehave enough caches under your belt. setup for the cache, and snapped a photo but the cache itself is gone. I searched the ground for the container but no luck. If co requires I'll email the photo.

 

You either care about numbers or you don't. I suspect Briansnat cares about the numbers more than he lets on. Maybe not his own, but he gets a little bent at people who ARE in it for the numbers. Just a little tiny bit bent. I'm not suggesting he loses sleep over it.

 

And for the record, I have cached off and on for 11 years with less than 200 finds. I mention this because, while numbers "don't matter", a lot of forum members check your stats and dismiss you as irrelevant if you don't eat, sleep, and breathe caching.

DOH! Guess he's in it for the numbers.

 

Or is it You might not be into numbers if... you claim a DNF for finding a zip tie.

 

Nice catch. LMAO

Sorry if I misled anyone. These are NOT Briansnat's logs. These are anonymous logs in the "found it = didn't find it" thread that Briansnat posted.

 

My point was that while Briansnat doesn't care about HIS numbers, he tends to call out those who he feels are "cheaters". So I think he does care about numbers on some level.

[+the4dirtydogs]

You MIGHT be INTO numbers if you regularly post in the "Found it = Didn't find it" thread.

 

11/21/2011

 

#598 - Does finding only a zip-tie count? Of course. I should have expected as much. I'm so glad I didn't save this one for my 600th. Not exactly a cacher's field of dreams with all the poorly-maintained caches here.

 

 

05/25/2011

 

Found thehave enough caches under your belt. setup for the cache, and snapped a photo but the cache itself is gone. I searched the ground for the container but no luck. If co requires I'll email the photo.

 

You either care about numbers or you don't. I suspect Briansnat cares about the numbers more than he lets on. Maybe not his own, but he gets a little bent at people who ARE in it for the numbers. Just a little tiny bit bent. I'm not suggesting he loses sleep over it.

 

And for the record, I have cached off and on for 11 years with less than 200 finds. I mention this because, while numbers "don't matter", a lot of forum members check your stats and dismiss you as irrelevant if you don't eat, sleep, and breathe caching.

DOH! Guess he's in it for the numbers.

 

Or is it You might not be into numbers if... you claim a DNF for finding a zip tie.

 

Nice catch. LMAO

Sorry if I misled anyone. These are NOT Briansnat's logs. These are anonymous logs in the "found it = didn't find it" thread that Briansnat posted.

 

My point was that while Briansnat doesn't care about HIS numbers, he tends to call out those who he feels are "cheaters". So I think he does care about numbers on some level.

DOH! LMAO!

[+briansnat]

You MIGHT be INTO numbers if you regularly post in the "Found it = Didn't find it" thread.

 

11/21/2011

 

#598 - Does finding only a zip-tie count? Of course. I should have expected as much. I'm so glad I didn't save this one for my 600th. Not exactly a cacher's field of dreams with all the poorly-maintained caches here.

 

 

05/25/2011

 

Found thehave enough caches under your belt. setup for the cache, and snapped a photo but the cache itself is gone. I searched the ground for the container but no luck. If co requires I'll email the photo.

 

You either care about numbers or you don't. I suspect Briansnat cares about the numbers more than he lets on. Maybe not his own, but he gets a little bent at people who ARE in it for the numbers. Just a little tiny bit bent. I'm not suggesting he loses sleep over it.

 

And for the record, I have cached off and on for 11 years with less than 200 finds. I mention this because, while numbers "don't matter", a lot of forum members check your stats and dismiss you as irrelevant if you don't eat, sleep, and breathe caching.

DOH! Guess he's in it for the numbers.

 

Or is it You might not be into numbers if... you claim a DNF for finding a zip tie.

 

Nice catch. LMAO

Sorry if I misled anyone. These are NOT Briansnat's logs. These are anonymous logs in the "found it = didn't find it" thread that Briansnat posted.

 

My point was that while Briansnat doesn't care about HIS numbers, he tends to call out those who he feels are "cheaters". So I think he does care about numbers on some level.

 

No names are used so I'm not calling out anybody. I'm simply contributing to a thread that shows the absurd lengths people will go through to add to their numbers through bogus logs that have the potential to affect other geocachers.

 

I don't care about my numbers or anybody else's until the pursuit of numbers has the potential to negatively affect other cachers or geocaching in general.

[Trinity's Crew]

You MIGHT be INTO numbers if you regularly post in the "Found it = Didn't find it" thread.

 

11/21/2011

 

#598 - Does finding only a zip-tie count? Of course. I should have expected as much. I'm so glad I didn't save this one for my 600th. Not exactly a cacher's field of dreams with all the poorly-maintained caches here.

 

 

05/25/2011

 

Found thehave enough caches under your belt. setup for the cache, and snapped a photo but the cache itself is gone. I searched the ground for the container but no luck. If co requires I'll email the photo.

 

You either care about numbers or you don't. I suspect Briansnat cares about the numbers more than he lets on. Maybe not his own, but he gets a little bent at people who ARE in it for the numbers. Just a little tiny bit bent. I'm not suggesting he loses sleep over it.

 

And for the record, I have cached off and on for 11 years with less than 200 finds. I mention this because, while numbers "don't matter", a lot of forum members check your stats and dismiss you as irrelevant if you don't eat, sleep, and breathe caching.

DOH! Guess he's in it for the numbers.

 

Or is it You might not be into numbers if... you claim a DNF for finding a zip tie.

 

Nice catch. LMAO

Sorry if I misled anyone. These are NOT Briansnat's logs. These are anonymous logs in the "found it = didn't find it" thread that Briansnat posted.

 

My point was that while Briansnat doesn't care about HIS numbers, he tends to call out those who he feels are "cheaters". So I think he does care about numbers on some level.

 

No names are used so I'm not calling out anybody. I'm simply contributing to a thread that shows the absurd lengths people will go through to add to their numbers through bogus logs that have the potential to affect other geocachers.

 

I don't care about my numbers or anybody else's until the pursuit of numbers has the potential to negatively affect other cachers or geocaching in general.

Fair enough.

[+wimseyguy]

I am into numbers, but only my numbers. I don't really give a rat's fig about the numbers or claims of others. I consider myself an omnivorous cachers. I've gone on power trail runs, I've driven past dozens of caches to get to a specific one to complete a challenge cache. I took a four mile walk on some trails where I could let the dog off leash, but planned it for an area that had 5-6 caches I hadn't found.

 

When I go on a cache run with friends, we try to slot mutual unfounds. But if we're passing one that isn't completely mutual, we'll stop and even play warmer/colder for the one who needs the find. I have been in parking lots with caches I have ignored, I rarely go out caching when I am at events. But we plan to find caches on the routes to/from events all the time. There are always caches near home that I haven't found. I probably desire to find them, but only if someone has already solved the puzzle and I am with them. I have stopped caching when I am not having fun, probably within 100' certainly within a mile. I am more likely to leave caches in a park unfound because I want an excuse to return to the park another time. I do know what my find count, give or take a few hundred. I have targeted specific memorable finds for major milestones. I have spent days with friends finding hundreds or a few. On solo days I'm less likely to go for a large number of finds. I think that one multi is worth one find and have no issue with that.

 

To sum up, I guess I am into the numbers, but I am more into having FUN finding caches. Sometimes it is fun to find more caches that are easier to find, sometimes it is more fun to find fewer caches that aren't quite so easy.

[+fizzymagic]

I like my numbers; I don't care about anyone else's. So if that makes me a "numbers person," I guess I am one.

 

Whenever I travel to another state or country, I always like to find at least one cache, both because it lets me keep track of my mileage, and because it automatically makes a record of the trip. Since I am the only person I know who keeps track of my caching mileage properly, it would be impossible to compare to others. But that's not the point, at least for me. It is fun to realize that I have cached to the moon and back!

 

That had a surprising benefit recently. I had to fill out the horrific SF86 form to have my clearance renewed. On it, you have to list every international trip you have taken in the last 7 years. All I had to do was to look at my caching finds outside the US, and bingo! Dates, countries, everything neatly organized for me.

 

Oh -- and the idea of claiming finds on caches that aren't there just doesn't make sense to me. It's not that I consider it cheating, since in order to cheat you have to have somebody to compete with and I refuse to compete. I used to be a lot more strict than I am now; I always insisted on signing the logbook myself, even when with a big group. Now, depending on the group dynamic, I will sometimes let somebody else sign for all of us. And I always insist on solving the puzzles for puzzle caches that I find, but I sometimes take along friends who "leech" (their word) off my solutions, and neither of us cares. I enjoyed the solving and they get to enjoy the find.

 

On the other hand, I find the bragging and posturing that one sees in cache logs and occasionally on these forums about various "achievements" obnoxious and pathetic. So I guess to that extent I kind of care a little.

Edited February 7, 2012 by fizzymagic

[+Mr.Benchmark]

Oh -- and the idea of claiming finds on caches that aren't there just doesn't make sense to me. It's not that I consider it cheating, since in order to cheat you have to have somebody to compete with and I refuse to compete.

 

I guess I see it as more of cheating yourself, and possibly the people who search after you do. Seems pointless to me too, though, I mean, if someone is going to pretend stuff happened that really didn't, why not pick a more enticing fantasy life?

 

I wonder if some people simply find some shame in logging "DNF"? As if they failed somehow (well, I guess they kind of did), or as if the CO fooled them somehow, and somehow that lessens them as a person?

 

There are some corporations that have constructed years worth of entirely fictious financial records. I think many start down that path by being unwilling to admit that they made costly mistakes, and so they hid it.

 

The pay for that is better than it is for this though, at least until you get caught.