Logging Event Temporary Caches

[+TooWiners]

I enjoy attending events and afterwards viewing the comments that other cachers post for that event. What I don't like is having to scroll thru hundreds of "logging 'xxx' event cache" postings. Would it be possible to get a seperate area for event postings to log the temporary cache finds and one for the comments only posts? What do other cachers think about this? I for one do not log temporary event caches (I'm not about numbers) because I think finding temp caches with a large group of people is not real geo-caching. This is not to say that I don't enjoy it and I think it is great fun at an event. However, I would like to be able to read comments about an event without all the temp postings.

[+Moose Mob]

This is one of those things where the rest of the world either shakes their head in shame while others will chose points their fingers and snicker.

 

Not sanctioned, not condoned. The guidelines don't support it, but they seem to be enjoying themselves.

Edited February 5, 2012 by Moose Mob

[+Isonzo Karst]

Would it be possible to get a seperate area for event postings to log the temporary cache finds and one for the comments only posts?

 

What you're asking for, given the way Geocaching.com currently works, would be best done as 2 listings. The event listing, and another cache (traditional) listing for logging temps. I have wondered why it isn't done this way now - ie, one real publishable cache as near to the event venue as possible, and the temps logged against it.

 

Of course, then that listing would have the problem of finds that were really on it, and the other finds, the "logging event temp #17" logs.

 

I can't imagine Geocaching.com spending developer time to make the logging of event temps against the event easier.

 

You may not realize it, but the practice of logging of temporary caches for + find count is not widely done, and often looked down upon by cachers in areas where it's not the norm (most of the world outside the central and upper midwest).

 

I find it harmless, though as you say, it makes reading the event listing tough.

Edited February 6, 2012 by Isonzo Karst

[+DanOCan]

I don't have an answer for you, but I'm sure glad that practice seems to be only practiced in limited regions -- I would find it annoying scrolling through a bunch of logs for temporary caches.

[Mr.Yuck]

I enjoy attending events and afterwards viewing the comments that other cachers post for that event. What I don't like is having to scroll thru hundreds of "logging 'xxx' event cache" postings. Would it be possible to get a seperate area for event postings to log the temporary cache finds and one for the comments only posts? What do other cachers think about this? I for one do not log temporary event caches (I'm not about numbers) because I think finding temp caches with a large group of people is not real geo-caching. This is not to say that I don't enjoy it and I think it is great fun at an event. However, I would like to be able to read comments about an event without all the temp postings.

 

Lets see, I pegged you for Wisconsin, Ohio, The West Virginia Panhandle, or Western Pa. before I even clicked on your profile. I guess it's the 4th one.

 

Which is my point, these are pretty much the only 4 places in the world where they do this. This practice is unheard of outside the USA. I seriously doubt they (Geocaching.com) will ever do anything at this point, as logging "temporary caches" at events is practically a dead practice.

 

EDIT: Re-reading my post, I mean they will not do anything as far as doing something to separate the logs. A tiny little regional blip on the radar screen, in the grand scheme of things.

Edited February 5, 2012 by Mr.Yuck

[+Don_J]

I don't have an answer for you, but I'm sure glad that practice seems to be only practiced in limited regions -- I would find it annoying scrolling through a bunch of logs for temporary caches.

 

I've put events on my watchlist so as to see comments about the event. Having hundreds of emails about people finding temp caches 30' apart would be beyond annoying. I'm really glad that it never caught on in these parts.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

'Tis funny...

Like Mr. Yuck, I pegged you too, but for eastern Ohio. I guess W-PA is close enuf.

 

You can see from other posts, such a thing is localized. The rest just kinda walk away shakin' their heads.

[AZcachemeister]

I think finding temp caches with a large group of people is not real geo-caching.

 

Precisely.

 

Temporary caches hidden for the enjoyment of the event attendees are just that...for the enjoyment of the event attendees.

 

If the event organizer(s) allow the practice, there is nothing to be done.

 

I do think it is rather pathetic both on the part of the organizers and the attendees.

Would I not attend an event unless I could log it 10 or 12 times?

If I hold an event, would I fear there would be low attendance unless I allow multiple logging? Would my status in the community decline if I didn't?

[+secretagentbill]

I was at that event yesterday. I didn't find any of the temp caches. But of course I wouldn't have logged them if I had. When I attended my first event (Western PA) a few years ago, I made the mistake of having the event cache on my watch list. By the time I got home, I had several hundred emails as all the goofballs racked up their numbers with duplicate logs. But hey, if that's what floats their boat, more power to 'em.

[+Gamaliel]

If they are caches, then publish them as caches. If they are just something you did at the event, then it's part of the event. Logging event activities as additional finds is like logging the burgers and cake you ate at the event.

[+Coldgears]

I logged an event cache twice. However, in my case, they were two different events, two different times 5 miles apart, and 4 hours apart. Just listed under the same event cache.

[+Moose Mob]

I logged an event cache twice. However, in my case, they were two different events, two different times 5 miles apart, and 4 hours apart. Just listed under the same event cache.

Sounds like it should have been two different events.

[+tozainamboku]

I logged an event cache twice. However, in my case, they were two different events, two different times 5 miles apart, and 4 hours apart. Just listed under the same event cache.

Sounds like it should have been two different events.

Probably. But I bet the reviewer thought it was stacking and used the obscure stacking guideline to force them to be listed as one event.

 

People would create several events out of one event. 1) log the sign is, 2) log the travel bug exchanges, 3) log the pot luck, etc. So TPTB instituted the no stacking rule. But it's mostly up to reviewer discretion what is stacking so now two events the the same day but miles apart may be forced to be listed as one event.

 

Both the logging of multiple attends for stacked event and the practice of logging temporary cache started as a response to what seems to be an arbitrary guideline change. Originally, temporary caches events could be listed as caches. But Groundspeak got some complaints - perhaps from reviewers - and the cache permanence guideline was added. In some areas the event caches could be left up after the event for a long enough time as to meet the new guideline. But in some area events were held in parks where the managers only approved the caches for the day of the event. Since reviewers would no longer publish these caches, people started to log them by creating multiple logs for the event.

 

While nowadays it seems like people log these events multiple times just to "bump" their numbers, this practice originally began as a way to log caches that could previously be logged but were suddenly no longer listed as separate caches because of an arbitrary guidelines change.

Edited February 6, 2012 by tozainamboku

[+lamoracke]

another reason (of many) I wish that GS had a built in locking system that would only allow 1 find per GC# period. Would prevent folks by accidentally logging caches sometimes 10 times with their cell phones, or in this case, logging a single event 12 times on purpose.

[Mr.Yuck]

I was at that event yesterday. I didn't find any of the temp caches. But of course I wouldn't have logged them if I had. When I attended my first event (Western PA) a few years ago, I made the mistake of having the event cache on my watch list. By the time I got home, I had several hundred emails as all the goofballs racked up their numbers with duplicate logs. But hey, if that's what floats their boat, more power to 'em.

 

First of all Bill, you can't be a secret agent if you use your real first name.

 

Second of all, you're no fun. What we need is an unapologetic multi-logger who was there to tell us off.

 

I think finding temp caches with a large group of people is not real geo-caching.

 

Precisely.

 

Temporary caches hidden for the enjoyment of the event attendees are just that...for the enjoyment of the event attendees.

 

If the event organizer(s) allow the practice, there is nothing to be done.

 

I do think it is rather pathetic both on the part of the organizers and the attendees.

Would I not attend an event unless I could log it 10 or 12 times?

If I hold an event, would I fear there would be low attendance unless I allow multiple logging? Would my status in the community decline if I didn't?

 

Well, the Wisconsin Geocaching Association voted to end this cheesy practice (pun intended) 3 or 4 years ago. And there were boycotts and the logging of the temporary caches anyway on other cache pages of sympathetic cache owners. I assmume temp logging still goes on at "privately owned" events in Wisconsin, but I don't live near there, and haven't looked.

[Dinoprophet]

I don't log events unless there are temporary caches, and then only once, rationale being if there weren't caches, I didn't find anything.

 

But you all just go on bumping up those "finds", I won't say anything!

 

(Seriously, I won't. I don't care what your numbers are.)

 

(Now I'll wait for someone to call me out on the 10th Anniversary event I logged even though there were no temporary caches. How do I live with this hypocrisy?)

[+secretagentbill]

First of all Bill, you can't be a secret agent if you use your real first name.

 

Second of all, you're no fun. What we need is an unapologetic multi-logger who was there to tell us off.

My real name isn't Bill..

I enjoyed the event and after watching eagles for the morning, headed off up the mountainside and found 15 other published caches. I did my first Wherigo, got a big milestone T4 cache, and ran into some nice cachers on the trails. I just didn't end up with time to do the temps. If I would have been there with a group of friends, I probably would have made more of an effort. I understand the desire to log them, but I just don't feel that logging 20 events in one day is the way to go.

 

Since I don't see them as loggable, I like when the temps have some other tie-in to the event. At one event I went to, for each temp you found, you got so many tickets for a chinese auction with some really cool prizes. So that was fun.

 

But I live in PA so maybe I should just hop on the multi-logging bandwagon LOL

[+bflentje]

I am surprised this was even brought up. I mean, we all used to do it. But that was so 1996. Since the practice was stopped in our area 5 years ago, I have not seen it happen since.

[+Castle Mischief]

1996

 

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

I am surprised this was even brought up. I mean, we all used to do it. But that was so 1996. Since the practice was stopped in our area 5 years ago, I have not seen it happen since.

 

Never had, never will. And I will delete such logs from any event I host.

[+wimseyguy]

Well, yeah-but you are in RI where there is plenty of space to hide real and permanent caches for the events.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Well, yeah-but you are in RI where there is plenty of space to hide real and permanent caches for the events.

 

Especially when you consider RI gets a dispensation from the 528' rule...we are allowed to hide them 400' apart.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just kidding.

[Mr.Yuck]

First of all Bill, you can't be a secret agent if you use your real first name.

 

Second of all, you're no fun. What we need is an unapologetic multi-logger who was there to tell us off.

My real name isn't Bill..

I enjoyed the event and after watching eagles for the morning, headed off up the mountainside and found 15 other published caches. I did my first Wherigo, got a big milestone T4 cache, and ran into some nice cachers on the trails. I just didn't end up with time to do the temps. If I would have been there with a group of friends, I probably would have made more of an effort. I understand the desire to log them, but I just don't feel that logging 20 events in one day is the way to go.

 

Since I don't see them as loggable, I like when the temps have some other tie-in to the event. At one event I went to, for each temp you found, you got so many tickets for a chinese auction with some really cool prizes. So that was fun.

 

But I live in PA so maybe I should just hop on the multi-logging bandwagon LOL

 

Oh, it doesn't bother me, let them do it. I would not jump on the bandwagon though.

[Mr.Yuck]

I am surprised this was even brought up. I mean, we all used to do it. But that was so 1996. Since the practice was stopped in our area 5 years ago, I have not seen it happen since.

 

Yes, 1996, wasn't it? It died in NY State a 3-4 years ago. The last 3 times I saw it happen, twice at events hosted by our Statewide Geocaching organization (which no longer exists in favor or regional ones), and once at a large annual (but not MEGA) event, the after event cache pages turned into total forums on the practice after some, but not all, of the attendees practiced temp cache logging. It was kinda ugly. The large annual event stopped sanctioning the practice after that.

 

And little known fact, the Allegheny Geobash in NY State used to do it before they attained MEGA status 3 years ago. But that's a non-issue, MEGA events are not allowed to have temp cache logging. Another little known fact.

[+Sol seaker]

If they are caches, then publish them as caches. If they are just something you did at the event, then it's part of the event. Logging event activities as additional finds is like logging the burgers and cake you ate at the event.

 

OH NO!

Are you telling me NOW that I shouldn't have logged the burgers and cake???

[+dfx]

Not sanctioned, not condoned.

 

So why is it even possible to log an event as attended twice?

[+Rross1973]

I was reading all the replies to this topic and didn't relize how many cachers do not log temp. caches. I am from NE Ohio. We consider it a normal practice in our area that it's ok to log temp. caches. There are some cachers who do not log temps and that's ok. It's not a big deal. Everyone plays the game their own way. Here is the last event my wife and I attended where we logged over 70 temps.

 

Six More Weeks of Winter

[+Moose Mob]

*** FAIR WARNING ***

 

Don't be getting personal with folks who post here. before swooping in like buzzards, remember there is a TOU that *must* to be followed.

[+jellis]

another reason (of many) I wish that GS had a built in locking system that would only allow 1 find per GC# period. Would prevent folks by accidentally logging caches sometimes 10 times with their cell phones, or in this case, logging a single event 12 times on purpose.

One log per cache. I have seen many newbie cachers accidently log more then once on their smartphones thinking they didn't see it go through right away.

If a cacher allowed more then one log on their cache is frowned upon then yes I agree. I don't see why GC didn't think of that.

[+jellis]

I am surprised this was even brought up. I mean, we all used to do it. But that was so 1996. Since the practice was stopped in our area 5 years ago, I have not seen it happen since.

 

Never had, never will. And I will delete such logs from any event I host.

I too haven't done it, but then we don't practice that out here as far as I know. I even went through my finds and deleted all my duplicates, even after I was giving permission by the owner. It just doesn't seem right. Just like COs who log finds on their own caches saying "I had to do maintenance and so I had to find my cache". Except ones I had to find to adopt them.

[+hydnsek]

another reason (of many) I wish that GS had a built in locking system that would only allow 1 find per GC# period. Would prevent folks by accidentally logging caches sometimes 10 times with their cell phones, or in this case, logging a single event 12 times on purpose.

+1. The odd practice of logging temp caches on events has never been in vogue here in the shadow of the Lily Pad (read: Pacific Northwet), and yes, we do tend to scoff at those who need to pad their numbers by logging unlisted caches.

 

That said, I confess there is one cache I wish I could log as a Find multiple times: Groundspeak Headquarters. I've visited it at four different spots over the years, and I had to find each one of them. (Yes, I know I could do it, but none of the other kids do.)

Edited February 7, 2012 by hydnsek

[+hydnsek]

I was reading all the replies to this topic and didn't relize how many cachers do not log temp. caches. I am from NE Ohio. We consider it a normal practice in our area that it's ok to log temp. caches. There are some cachers who do not log temps and that's ok. It's not a big deal. Everyone plays the game their own way. Here is the last event my wife and I attended where we logged over 70 temps.

 

Six More Weeks of Winter

5,376 Attended logs - Holy Carp!

 

Apologies to Moose Mob

[+jellis]

another reason (of many) I wish that GS had a built in locking system that would only allow 1 find per GC# period. Would prevent folks by accidentally logging caches sometimes 10 times with their cell phones, or in this case, logging a single event 12 times on purpose.

+1. The odd practice of logging temp caches on events has never been in vogue here in the shadow of the Lily Pad (read: Pacific Northwet), and yes, we do tend to scoff at those who need to pad their numbers by logging unlisted caches.

 

That said, I confess there is one cache I wish I could log as a Find multiple times: Groundspeak Headquarters. I've visited it at four different spots over the years, and I had to find each one of them. (Yes, I know I could do it, but none of the other kids do.)

Yeah too bad they didn't just assign a different number for each location.

[Mr.Yuck]

*** FAIR WARNING ***

 

Don't be getting personal with folks who post here. before swooping in like buzzards, remember there is a TOU that *must* to be followed.

 

Post has been resized Unless there was some nasty post that was so bad you had to delete it, I have no clue why the size 7 font fair warning was necessary.

 

Rross, it's true about NE Ohio. I once referred to "Ohio" another time this subject came up, and people from Columbus and Toledo were all like "yo' we don't do that."

 

The event referenced in the OP in NW Pa., I think people were logging it about 10-12 times, not 70. The problem I have with the TWC club's frequent numbers frenzies is that the caches are 200-300 feet apart, and don't meet the guidelines, and therefore are not caches in my opinion. I can't speak for the event you went to, but I've seen the .gpx file for the last two annual TWC fall events.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

I was reading all the replies to this topic and didn't relize how many cachers do not log temp. caches. I am from NE Ohio. We consider it a normal practice in our area that it's ok to log temp. caches. There are some cachers who do not log temps and that's ok. It's not a big deal. Everyone plays the game their own way. Here is the last event my wife and I attended where we logged over 70 temps.

 

Six More Weeks of Winter

5,376 Attended logs - Holy Carp!

 

Apologies to Moose Mob

 

Yeah...that's more than GeoWoodstock! Check out this event - over 11,000 attended logs!

 

In reading the description for the Autumn Geo Event (linked to above), it reads like an organized cache hunt. Something that really shouldn't even be published!

 

And when 1/4 of your finds are based on event multi-logging (for temporary caches), something's wrong.

[+lamoracke]

I was reading all the replies to this topic and didn't relize how many cachers do not log temp. caches. I am from NE Ohio. We consider it a normal practice in our area that it's ok to log temp. caches. There are some cachers who do not log temps and that's ok. It's not a big deal. Everyone plays the game their own way. Here is the last event my wife and I attended where we logged over 70 temps.

 

Six More Weeks of Winter

5,376 Attended logs - Holy Carp!

 

Apologies to Moose Mob

 

Yeah...that's more than GeoWoodstock! Check out this event - over 11,000 attended logs!

 

In reading the description for the Autumn Geo Event (linked to above), it reads like an organized cache hunt. Something that really shouldn't even be published!

 

And when 1/4 of your finds are based on event multi-logging (for temporary caches), something's wrong.

 

I see one person logged the event 91 times. However, if you go to that person's event totals, there is only one event there.

 

We had an event in our area where the CO wanted folks to find caches to have something to do up there. He actually published caches to accomplish that, what a strange concept. There are some folks who archive some of their caches so there is room for new additional ones. I would not do #2, but it sure beats someone logging the same GC# 91 times in my opinion.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

I see one person logged the event 91 times. However, if you go to that person's event totals, there is only one event there.

 

I noticed that, too. If a person logged it more than once, it will only show up once per page of 20 finds. If you scroll to the next page, you will also see that same event listed just once.

[+Roman!]

XXXX has found 2260 caches (1451 distinct)

XXXX has found 162 caches (68 distinct)

 

Wow!

[Skippermark]

Closing this thread. It's going nowhere and personal attacks are not allowed. In the future, when a moderator reminds people to stick to the Terms of Use, please do so.