Is it fair?

[Clan Riffster]

To be honest, i would think some of the "legitimate" finders might feel they were "robbed" when they found out that i kept allowing people to log it who didn't do it as intended.

Robbed of what?

 

Robbed is not the best word to use here. It's hard for me to explain what i mean exactly but i'm sure there may be some who understand.

 

I, and i don't think i'm the only one, like the feeling of accomplishment i have after figuring out and finding a challenging cache. Seeing my name on that short list of found logs is something i would feel good about now, and for the life of the cache. For me, this feeling would begin to diminish if too many find logs started coming in from people i knew who were only able to get the cache because they were given coordinates by someone else.

 

Yeah, i know what i accomplished and that's the main thing that should count. I also realize this is small potatoes compared to other important things in life. But in a social game/sport/hobby such as this, i also know that my accomplishment (the found log on that hard cache) would not look quite the same if it was on a page full of other found logs.

I think, in the context used, "Robbed" is the word you were looking for.

 

If I understand your theory, assuming we both log finds on the cache in the space station;

 

Let's say you got your visa up to date, trained for months for zero gravity environment work, travelled to Russia, paid the requisite 10 million dollar fee and got a ride on the earliest rocket. Once at the space station, you searched till you found the cache, signed the log, got the crew to take lots of pictures, then headed home, posting your find at the earliest opportunity. While I met with a crew member of the rocket which carried the cache to the space station, sneaking my moniker into the logbook before it ever launched, claiming my find.

 

You feel that your log has a certain value, and that my log would somehow diminish that value, without your consent.

 

Robbery seems like a valid phrase to describe such an act.

 

I just don't see it that way. From my perspective, had the two finds been reversed, your easy-peasy log would in no way lessen the experience I had in making the actual trip and finding the cache as intended. Since the experience is not reduced, and my smiley count is not reduced, I can't view your actions as having taken anything from me.

 

I'm not suggesting that your view is wrong. It isn't. It just isn't my view.

 

Nothing you do can change the experience I had finding a cache.

[+tozainamboku]

Logging a find online without signing the physical logs is not permitted, and such logs should be removed by the CO.

Of course, I couldn't let this one slide. There is no such rule. What there is are the following guidelines which people often misinterpret as the "rule" you gave.

 

The first one is that a cache owner is responsible for the quality of post to their cache page and should delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or otherwise in appropriate. There is no definition of what bogus means, and some cache owners may choose to say that if the physical log was not signed the log is bogus. Of course other may also say that if someone got a spoiler from a third party then their log is bogus.

 

So that brings us the second guideline. A cache owner may not have additional requirements for posting a find beyond finding the cache and signing the physical log. Once the physical log is signed a cacher can log the find online being relatively certain that their log won't be deleted.

 

That should put an end to this discussion. If a group cooperated on a complex multi or puzzle, so long as they signed the physical log the owner shouldn't be allowed to delete the log. Of course we then get into the discussion as to whether or not someone singing with a group name ensures that all the members can log the find (but this is another issue).

 

What I find interesting is that some owners who don't agree with this feel the need to archive their caches if people start logging them without meeting their "intent". I could see this as a protest against the Groundspeak guidelines, but am having trouble with the argument that they are protecting the so-called "legitimate" finders.

 

People are trying to use the online find as some kind of reward system. This is not what it was meant for.

 

Sorry Toz, but the online log IS a reward.

It always has been and always will be. (At least since the inception of this website.)

 

When I find a cache and sign the log, I reward myself by posting an online 'Found It! ' log for the cache.

If the CO agrees with my assessment that I 'found' the cache, (and I deserve my reward) the log stands.

If the CO does not find my mark on the log, and decides my excuses for not signing are excessively flimsy, they can delete my log.

 

Every day people are risking life and limb to SIGN THE LOG, and every once in a while someone actually dies in the effort to do so. If that isn't serious business, I don't know what is.

 

If I go out with some friends to 'play Frisbee' (not Frisbee golf or any of the other codified games) but I never manage to actually catch the Frisbee...was I actually playing Frisbee, or just standing there having it tossed at me?

 

Sorry again, Toz, but this windmill isn't coming down anytime soon.

I don't deny that geocachers get a shot of dopamine when they find a cache. For some this comes when they open the cache and sign the physical log. Others may get some more dopamine when they log the find online see the number by their name go up or the icon on the map turn into s smiley face.

 

It may be true that for some urban hides and perhaps for some power trails, cache owners are placing their caches to let dopamine addicts get their fix by finding caches "for the numbers". Yet many people still like to search for urban hides simply because it gives them a chance to go geocaching during the week, and people do the power trail because it's fun to put a group together and spend 24 hours geocaching together. Whether or not a cache was place to provide and opportunity for someone to get a dopamine reward when they log the find online, I have to believe that many people are getting more enjoyment from the actually time spent hunting the caches.

 

It use to be the case that cache owners could have additional requirements to log a find online that went beyond signing the log. Some took advantage of the dopamine reward that some people get when they post a find online and made requirements that were burdensome and inappropriate for a game whose main goal is not to compete for the most finds but instead to have fun. TPTB eventually decided to ban all ALR caches (other than geocaching challenges) rather than to have to deal with which are appropriate or not.

 

My comment was meant more toward the specifics of this discussion. Here some cache owner had placed a cache with some specific challenge they wanted the finders to perform. When someone figured out that they can find the cache without performing the challenge (or in this case split up the challenge among members of a team), these owners want to deny the online find log - as if this is something that rewards the challenge. The ALR rule should make it clear that, aside from the exception for geocaching challenges, the online find is meant for the cacher to record their find and is not a reward that the owner can give out because you did everything just as they intended.

Edited August 12, 2012 by tozainamboku

[cezanne]

 

What I find interesting is that some owners who don't agree with this feel the need to archive their caches if people start logging them without meeting their "intent". I could see this as a protest against the Groundspeak guidelines, but am having trouble with the argument that they are protecting the so-called "legitimate" finders.

 

I can only speak for myself. I would not want to delete such logs and if I decided to archive a cache of mine in such a situation, it would be a protest against the Groundspeak guidelines.

For me it's about people's behaviour and not about Groundspeak.

 

My comment was meant more toward the specifics of this discussion. Here some cache owner had placed a cache with some specific challenge they wanted the finders to perform. When someone figured out that they can find the cache without performing the challenge (or in this case split up the challenge among members of a team), these owners want to deny the online find log - as if this is something that rewards the challenge. The ALR rule should make it clear that, aside from the exception for geocaching challenges, the online find is meant for the cacher to record their find and is not a reward that the owner can give out because you did everything just as they intended.

 

Who wrote that someones wants to deny an online find in this case? What I would like to have is that it is just a small ignorable minority that acts in the discussed manner.

 

Cezanne

Edited August 13, 2012 by cezanne

[+dprovan]

We have an expression in English (probably the same in German) - "I'm going to take my ball and go home". Seems appropriate.

I don't see it as that at all.

 

Placing a cache that i have put some work into and then finding that too many people are just skipping the challenging part and going straight to the final because someone else gives them the coordinates would frustrate me as well. I don't mind people coming up with other methods of figuring out our caches and it's fine if someone finds the cache by accident. But i do mind if too many log the find only because someone gives them the coordinates. People doing this a few times is one thing but i would take the cache out if i found that most of the found it logs were from people who never even figured out the puzzle or did the legs on the multi. To be honest, i would think some of the "legitimate" finders might feel they were "robbed" when they found out that i kept allowing people to log it who didn't do it as intended.

Without commenting on your attitude, I just wanted to point out that this is a quintessential example of taking your ball and going home: people aren't playing by the rules you want them to play with, so you are going to end the game by withdrawing your cache so no one will be able to play with it under any rules.

 

As I said to cezanne, it's really too bad that someone not doing it the way you want would frustrate you to the point of not letting anyone approach it in any way.

 

The odd thing is that I typically abide by the CO's desires, so I don't really understand people that just ask friends for final coordinates. But I don't find those people diminish my sense of accomplishment. Perhaps that's because there are only a handful of cachers that regularly skip the work around here.

[4wheelin_fool]

Logging a find online without signing the physical logs is not permitted, and such logs should be removed by the CO.

Of course, I couldn't let this one slide. There is no such rule. What there is are the following guidelines which people often misinterpret as the "rule" you gave.

 

The first one is that a cache owner is responsible for the quality of post to their cache page and should delete logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or otherwise in appropriate. There is no definition of what bogus means, and some cache owners may choose to say that if the physical log was not signed the log is bogus. Of course other may also say that if someone got a spoiler from a third party then their log is bogus.

 

So that brings us the second guideline. A cache owner may not have additional requirements for posting a find beyond finding the cache and signing the physical log. Once the physical log is signed a cacher can log the find online being relatively certain that their log won't be deleted.

 

That should put an end to this discussion. If a group cooperated on a complex multi or puzzle, so long as they signed the physical log the owner shouldn't be allowed to delete the log. Of course we then get into the discussion as to whether or not someone singing with a group name ensures that all the members can log the find (but this is another issue).

 

What I find interesting is that some owners who don't agree with this feel the need to archive their caches if people start logging them without meeting their "intent". I could see this as a protest against the Groundspeak guidelines, but am having trouble with the argument that they are protecting the so-called "legitimate" finders.

 

People are trying to use the online find as some kind of reward system. This is not what it was meant for.

 

Sorry Toz, but the online log IS a reward.

It always has been and always will be. (At least since the inception of this website.)

 

When I find a cache and sign the log, I reward myself by posting an online 'Found It! ' log for the cache.

If the CO agrees with my assessment that I 'found' the cache, (and I deserve my reward) the log stands.

If the CO does not find my mark on the log, and decides my excuses for not signing are excessively flimsy, they can delete my log.

 

Every day people are risking life and limb to SIGN THE LOG, and every once in a while someone actually dies in the effort to do so. If that isn't serious business, I don't know what is.

 

If I go out with some friends to 'play Frisbee' (not Frisbee golf or any of the other codified games) but I never manage to actually catch the Frisbee...was I actually playing Frisbee, or just standing there having it tossed at me?

 

Sorry again, Toz, but this windmill isn't coming down anytime soon.

I don't deny that geocachers get a shot of dopamine when they find a cache. For some this comes when they open the cache and sign the physical log. Others may get some more dopamine when they log the find online see the number by their name go up or the icon on the map turn into s smiley face.

 

It may be true that for some urban hides and perhaps for some power trails, cache owners are placing their caches to let dopamine addicts get their fix by finding caches "for the numbers". Yet many people still like to search for urban hides simply because it gives them a chance to go geocaching during the week, and people do the power trail because it's fun to put a group together and spend 24 hours geocaching together. Whether or not a cache was place to provide and opportunity for someone to get a dopamine reward when they log the find online, I have to believe that many people are getting more enjoyment from the actually time spent hunting the caches.

 

It use to be the case that cache owners could have additional requirements to log a find online that went beyond signing the log. Some took advantage of the dopamine reward that some people get when they post a find online and made requirements that were burdensome and inappropriate for a game whose main goal is not to compete for the most finds but instead to have fun. TPTB eventually decided to ban all ALR caches (other than geocaching challenges) rather than to have to deal with which are appropriate or not.

 

My comment was meant more toward the specifics of this discussion. Here some cache owner had placed a cache with some specific challenge they wanted the finders to perform. When someone figured out that they can find the cache without performing the challenge (or in this case split up the challenge among members of a team), these owners want to deny the online find log - as if this is something that rewards the challenge. The ALR rule should make it clear that, aside from the exception for geocaching challenges, the online find is meant for the cacher to record their find and is not a reward that the owner can give out because you did everything just as they intended.

 

In some cases it IS a reward. It's just another flavor of ice cream that doesn't mix well with some of the other flavors. If the cache owner discovers that some cachers are adding extra ingredients to his ice cream that were not intended, he may withdraw it. He doesnt want his flavors mixed up with the others, or ingested in ways not intended. If there is a list of people who ate his hot chili sherbert, should it include those who saturated it with vanilla? Banish the thought!

[cezanne]

Without commenting on your attitude, I just wanted to point out that this is a quintessential example of taking your ball and going home: people aren't playing by the rules you want them to play with, so you are going to end the game by withdrawing your cache so no one will be able to play with it under any rules.

 

As I said to cezanne, it's really too bad that someone not doing it the way you want would frustrate you to the point of not letting anyone approach it in any way.

 

The odd thing is that I typically abide by the CO's desires, so I don't really understand people that just ask friends for final coordinates. But I don't find those people diminish my sense of accomplishment. Perhaps that's because there are only a handful of cachers that regularly skip the work around here.

 

I indeed think that the number of cachers skipping the work plays an essential rule and have mentioned before that this aspect plays a role in my decision whether or not I'd keep a cache.

 

Sometimes it is not too easy to draw the line. For example, I personally do not have a rule that I wait for say at least 10 finders until I provide help for a difficult cache of mine. I decide this on an individual basis and depending on the case and the background of the cacher involved. There are cachers in my area that feel annoyed if a cache owner decides to provide help to those who asked as they would not want to ask for help, but do want all others do spend at least the same amount of time than they have invested.

 

If the situation reaches the point where it appears to be the normal practice to newcomers to skip some part of the work or all work, they assume that this has been done also by those who did all the work on their own and this certainly contributes to diminishing the accomplishment of those from the point of view of the newcomers.

 

Cezanne

[+Mudfrog]

We have an expression in English (probably the same in German) - "I'm going to take my ball and go home". Seems appropriate.

I don't see it as that at all.

 

Placing a cache that i have put some work into and then finding that too many people are just skipping the challenging part and going straight to the final because someone else gives them the coordinates would frustrate me as well. I don't mind people coming up with other methods of figuring out our caches and it's fine if someone finds the cache by accident. But i do mind if too many log the find only because someone gives them the coordinates. People doing this a few times is one thing but i would take the cache out if i found that most of the found it logs were from people who never even figured out the puzzle or did the legs on the multi. To be honest, i would think some of the "legitimate" finders might feel they were "robbed" when they found out that i kept allowing people to log it who didn't do it as intended.

Without commenting on your attitude, I just wanted to point out that this is a quintessential example of taking your ball and going home: people aren't playing by the rules you want them to play with, so you are going to end the game by withdrawing your cache so no one will be able to play with it under any rules.

 

As I said to cezanne, it's really too bad that someone not doing it the way you want would frustrate you to the point of not letting anyone approach it in any way.

 

The odd thing is that I typically abide by the CO's desires, so I don't really understand people that just ask friends for final coordinates. But I don't find those people diminish my sense of accomplishment. Perhaps that's because there are only a handful of cachers that regularly skip the work around here.

 

Your first line suggests that you think i copped an attitude or something. My attitude to respect another cacher's cache is really not a bad attitude to have.

 

Let's say you were the one that placed that challenging multi or puzzle cache. You wanted it to be challenging so you put out 4 difficult to get to stages or added a hard puzzle to be solved. After setting this up and getting the cache published, logs start coming in that you found out were only there because someone else simply gave them coordinates that lead those cachers straight to the final. You might say that you don't care but then i would have to ask, why place the challenging cache in the first place?

 

And this may be where the difference in our opinion lies. You may not have ever placed one of these caches and if that's the case, then you probably wouldn't understand where we who have placed them are coming from.

 

Just to be clear,, i have a few caches like this. I'm not a stickler wanting cachers to adhere to strict rules when finding my cache. I have no problem with anyone getting hints and/or figuring out another way to find them. I just don't want a cheat site or another person giving out the final coordinates to a cache that i have placed.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Without commenting on your attitude, I just wanted to point out that this is a quintessential example of taking your ball and going home: people aren't playing by the rules you want them to play with, so you are going to end the game by withdrawing your cache so no one will be able to play with it under any rules.

 

As I said to cezanne, it's really too bad that someone not doing it the way you want would frustrate you to the point of not letting anyone approach it in any way.

 

The odd thing is that I typically abide by the CO's desires, so I don't really understand people that just ask friends for final coordinates. But I don't find those people diminish my sense of accomplishment. Perhaps that's because there are only a handful of cachers that regularly skip the work around here.

 

There is a local area with some very tough mystery caches, yclept 'dastardly'.

Routinely, groups (I think the last group had twenty three cachers) will descend on the area and find a large number of them. How many of the twenty three have actually solved the puzzles? One or two. I had eighteen finds on one of my caches that day. (Obviously the other five had no idea of what caches they found..) They signed with an acronym "FDiP" "Fun Day in the Park" or some such. Did 'they' find the cache? Yup! Did 'they' sign the log? "FNDiP" did. Is the find valid? Yup. Am I annoyed and thinking that they cheated? Nope. Did the owner of the fifteen very tough, dastardly mystrey caches complain, or think that they were cheating? Nope. We welcome finds on our caches! Sign log, get smiley. Or as Toz might prefer: Sign log, and your find cannot be deleted.

[+VegasVern]

Hmmm.. I am considering setting up a Multi Night-Time Cache where you get the coords for the next location by visiting a specific point etc etc. Am I wasting my time by making it a Multi? Should I just do a Handful of Mystery so that each "Step" people complete will reward them with a Log until they reach the Final Location? Because of this Article I am considering Moving the Final Location Every Month so people who share it may end up looking forever... What do you think? All Feedback is Appreciated

[+dprovan]

Your first line suggests that you think i copped an attitude or something. My attitude to respect another cacher's cache is really not a bad attitude to have.

No, sorry, my mistake. I specifically did not mean to imply that your attitude was "bad". I just meant my statement wasn't commenting on your opinion, which is yours to have, merely pointing out that it was, in fact, taking your ball and going home. The whole point of my adding that prefix is that I have no objection to you doing that, I just want to make sure you recognize it for what it is.

 

Let's say you were the one that placed that challenging multi or puzzle cache. You wanted it to be challenging so you put out 4 difficult to get to stages or added a hard puzzle to be solved. After setting this up and getting the cache published, logs start coming in that you found out were only there because someone else simply gave them coordinates that lead those cachers straight to the final. You might say that you don't care but then i would have to ask, why place the challenging cache in the first place?

So why do you place a challenging cache? I assume it's for the pleasure of people meeting the challenge and your pleasure at reading about their experience. In my eyes, withdrawing the cache in reaction to someone else doing something else does nothing particularly interesting other than make absolutely certain that none of those people you were hoping would enjoy your cache by meeting your challenge will ever have that chance.

 

I just don't want a cheat site or another person giving out the final coordinates to a cache that i have placed.

That's perfectly reasonable. I thought you didn't want to have a cache that a cheat site or another person gave out coordinates to, and that's something else entirely. No, I don't like it when people simply give out answers to my puzzle caches, but it would never occur to me to react by archiving the cache. That just makes no sense at all to me. Why should I punish the people I designed the cache for because someone I didn't design the cache for found a way to get around fully enjoying it?

[+OZ2CPU]

why is it funny to make a multicache 100km long, to make more polution ?

 

I made a 4 stage multi about 16m long walk,

there is about 4meters between the stages,

just to prove it can be VERY short too..

[cezanne]

why is it funny to make a multicache 100km long, to make more polution ?

 

Almost all very long multicaches that I know in my country are intended for hiking.

Look for example at this list

http://www.geocaching.com/bookmarks/view.aspx?guid=f5434dd1-506b-4cba-8249-f8bdf7d5f1b8

and this cache

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=bc6fc608-511d-4790-91a6-63898366b82c

 

It is a special feeling to walk long distances and over several days.That's also the reason why long distance hiking trails are popular.

A 16km multi cache is no special experience which directly implied from the length (it can be nice in the same way as a 5km or 10km cache).

 

Cezanne

[+OZ2CPU]

>That's also the reason why long distance hiking trails are popular.

 

the first on your list, found 5 times in ONE year.. yes that is very popular ?

[cezanne]

>That's also the reason why long distance hiking trails are popular.

 

the first on your list, found 5 times in ONE year.. yes that is very popular ?

 

Long distance hiking trails existed long before geocaching and will long exist after geocaching has vanished.

 

Of course long distance hiking appeals to a special audience, but some long distance hiking trails like the Jacobs Trail in Spain are already too crowded.

 

There are many hundreds of people who hike to Mariazell each year and still only a few geocachers who visit the Graz-Mariazell cache which is also on that list.

The few that do the cache have a lot to tell and to each of them the hike was a special experience they will never forget.

I enjoy reading the logs of such caches also without having been there. The logs contains so many interesting stories that go far beyond the status of a container, the exactness of the coordinates and other standard stuff typically contained in geocaching logs that are boring for everyone except the maintainer of the cache.

 

 

Cezanne

[+Mudfrog]

Your first line suggests that you think i copped an attitude or something. My attitude to respect another cacher's cache is really not a bad attitude to have.

No, sorry, my mistake. I specifically did not mean to imply that your attitude was "bad". I just meant my statement wasn't commenting on your opinion, which is yours to have, merely pointing out that it was, in fact, taking your ball and going home. The whole point of my adding that prefix is that I have no objection to you doing that, I just want to make sure you recognize it for what it is.

 

Let's say you were the one that placed that challenging multi or puzzle cache. You wanted it to be challenging so you put out 4 difficult to get to stages or added a hard puzzle to be solved. After setting this up and getting the cache published, logs start coming in that you found out were only there because someone else simply gave them coordinates that lead those cachers straight to the final. You might say that you don't care but then i would have to ask, why place the challenging cache in the first place?

So why do you place a challenging cache? I assume it's for the pleasure of people meeting the challenge and your pleasure at reading about their experience. In my eyes, withdrawing the cache in reaction to someone else doing something else does nothing particularly interesting other than make absolutely certain that none of those people you were hoping would enjoy your cache by meeting your challenge will ever have that chance.

 

I just don't want a cheat site or another person giving out the final coordinates to a cache that i have placed.

That's perfectly reasonable. I thought you didn't want to have a cache that a cheat site or another person gave out coordinates to, and that's something else entirely. No, I don't like it when people simply give out answers to my puzzle caches, but it would never occur to me to react by archiving the cache. That just makes no sense at all to me. Why should I punish the people I designed the cache for because someone I didn't design the cache for found a way to get around fully enjoying it?

 

Thanks for the replies.

 

I'm thinking my statements may be making it sound like it wouldn't take much for me to archive one of our caches. That's not the case at all. I realize that groups come along where only one of the cachers actually did the solving of a puzzle. I know hints are given and pafs are used. That's the way it goes and not something i think much about. The thing that might bother me to the point of thinking about archival would be if too many, say 90%, of the found logs coming in were from those who used a cheat site or were given coordinates. I also figure that most of the logs from people who do this would probably be TFTC or something along those lines, so i wouldn't be missing much anyways... []

[+Mudfrog]

Hmmm.. I am considering setting up a Multi Night-Time Cache where you get the coords for the next location by visiting a specific point etc etc. Am I wasting my time by making it a Multi? Should I just do a Handful of Mystery so that each "Step" people complete will reward them with a Log until they reach the Final Location? Because of this Article I am considering Moving the Final Location Every Month so people who share it may end up looking forever... What do you think? All Feedback is Appreciated

 

Don't let this thread dissuade you any. Things have been brought up that, in all actuality, do not happen all that often. Your cache idea sounds like alot of fun. I would place it and see how everything goes before doing things like moving the final every month. You'll most likely find that you won't have any problems.