Virtual Tours

[+Corfman Clan]

It appears some people go on "Virtual" tours.

 

Here's one I was just told about: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?ul=Wild+Bill+and+Jabber

 

I just don't understand the reasoning behind this.

[+clarinetqueen]

Why don't you understand it? Everyone plays the game differently. Obviously they like virtuals. They can take you to some really neat places. What's the big deal?

[Mr.Yuck]

It appears some people go on "Virtual" tours.

 

Here's one I was just told about: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?ul=Wild+Bill+and+Jabber

 

I just don't understand the reasoning behind this.

 

Dude is from my area. Although, I've never met him personally (he's only attended 6 events ever) I have exhchanged emails with him, and I know he's a retired guy. So if the post is leaning towards armchair logging, no way in heck. All virtuals for a week is kind of unusual, and I have not known him to be one to ignore any caches or cache types in the past, but hey, I'm sure he's having a ball.

Edited January 9, 2013 by Mr.Yuck

[+MartyBartfast]

I think the suggestion is that it's unlikely (given the number and location of the virtuals) that the cacher(s) visited these locations, and they're armchair logging.

 

If it is armchair logging then this is bad for virtuals as a genre because they can be archived if they're found to be accepting lots of armchair logs and once they've been archived they can't come back (as virtuals are nolonger allowed).

 

Edit to change the tone, as reading Mr.Yuck's response and looking at the virtuals they've logged it's quite feasible they did do it.

Edited January 9, 2013 by MartyBartfast

[+The A-Team]

Dude is from my area. Although, I've never met him personally (he's only attended 6 events ever) I have exhchanged emails with him, and I know he's a retired guy. So if the post is leaning towards armchair logging, no way in heck. All virtuals for a week is kind of unusual, and I have not known him to be one to ignore any caches or cache types in the past, but hey, I'm sure he's having a ball.

If you hadn't posted this, my money would have been square on armchair logging. If you know him, you may want to fire off a message to him. He's logged a number of virtuals that require photos, but he hasn't uploaded any photos since September. Doing this makes it look a lot like armchair logging.

[+Panther&Pine]

I guess I should let Co's know with my log when I do my 25 of each type in a row deal later this year so that it doesn't look suspect.

[+Corfman Clan]

Dude is from my area. Although, I've never met him personally (he's only attended 6 events ever) I have exhchanged emails with him, and I know he's a retired guy. So if the post is leaning towards armchair logging, no way in heck. All virtuals for a week is kind of unusual, and I have not known him to be one to ignore any caches or cache types in the past, but hey, I'm sure he's having a ball.

I'm not even sure it would be possible to visit all those caches in one day with a helicopter. So yes, I'm leaning towards armchair logging, or at least a complete screw up on what caches were logged or the dates.

[+Corfman Clan]

Why don't you understand it? Everyone plays the game differently. Obviously they like virtuals. They can take you to some really neat places. What's the big deal?

Perhaps I should have written, Virtual Virtual tour?

[+clarinetqueen]

Well I admit I didn't look at each one too closely, but it didn't seem like THAT many in a day....doable if you live in a region with more virtuals than where I live. AZ/CA seemed like they would have more.

 

I'm just VERY careful not to start pointing fingers at other people. That's just me.

[Mr.Yuck]

Dude is from my area. Although, I've never met him personally (he's only attended 6 events ever) I have exhchanged emails with him, and I know he's a retired guy. So if the post is leaning towards armchair logging, no way in heck. All virtuals for a week is kind of unusual, and I have not known him to be one to ignore any caches or cache types in the past, but hey, I'm sure he's having a ball.

If you hadn't posted this, my money would have been square on armchair logging. If you know him, you may want to fire off a message to him. He's logged a number of virtuals that require photos, but he hasn't uploaded any photos since September. Doing this makes it look a lot like armchair logging.

 

Will do. Hey, he's an older guy. Maybe he has to get the photo's scanned.

[+geodarts]

I often will only include virtuals and earthcaches in a pq for an area that we visit, and go out of my way to do as many as I can, so that did not bother me. But the logistics here are problematic. I know where Hidden Waterfall is and getting there is not easy. It has long been on my "to do" list and I have been hoping to convince my family to go up there this Spring if circumstances permit. Getting from there to do a three mile hike to Excudilla Peak (with stops in between) would defy most of our abilities. There could be other explanations, of course, like not dating the logs correctly.

 

I have no problem with using the forums to suggest that people not virtually log virtuals since that can jeopardize them for the rest of us. Some of my favorite virtuals have been archived for this reason and others have been archived even as we were making plans to visit the area. But I am not sure that that a particular individual has to be singled out on the forums.

 

Rather than point fingers in the forums, I wonder if if anyone has politely contacted the cacher and explained the problem to him and politely asked that any logs that do not reflect actual visits be deleted or the dates corrected to avoid confusion. I did just in case . . . but am editing this because I notice that Mr. Yuck posted that he would do this, which was added after I started to write my original reply to this thread. So I hope he does not get flooded with emails.

 

Regardless, the lesson here is to please not armchair virtuals. And perhaps there is a better way or resolving this than the forums.

Edited January 9, 2013 by geodarts

[+hzoi]

Well, let's see.

 

We are in the area visiting family and when they asked what we would like to do, we gave them a list of spots that we wanted to visit. At first they were skeptical, but they quickly joined the fun. We all had a chuckle here and everyone tried to guess the origin.

 

We enjoyed ourselves, touring the area and searching for our favorite cache type.

 

Heading for a tour of the Gold country, we stopped for this day's chuckle.

 

This is our last day before heading home and we spent the day searching for urban caches. Thanks for sharing this historic structure and for adding to today's fun.

 

Sounds like they're on vacation to me. But you're right, they do deserve public shaming for what appears to be the high crime of logging the virtual caches they visited on the days they visited them.

 

(Or, not, and maybe you owe them an apology for calling them out on the forum.)

[+NeecesandNephews]

Well, let's see.

 

We are in the area visiting family and when they asked what we would like to do, we gave them a list of spots that we wanted to visit. At first they were skeptical, but they quickly joined the fun. We all had a chuckle here and everyone tried to guess the origin.

 

We enjoyed ourselves, touring the area and searching for our favorite cache type.

 

Heading for a tour of the Gold country, we stopped for this day's chuckle.

 

This is our last day before heading home and we spent the day searching for urban caches. Thanks for sharing this historic structure and for adding to today's fun.

 

Sounds like they're on vacation to me. But you're right, they do deserve public shaming for what appears to be the high crime of logging the virtual caches they visited on the days they visited them.

 

(Or, not, and maybe you owe them an apology for calling them out on the forum.)

 

This ^^^ Reading the logs makes it seem like they were actually there. Could have come home from a weeks trip, and logged them all at one time, without changing the default date. Honest mistake. Or not.

[+geodarts]

This ^^^ Reading the logs makes it seem like they were actually there. Could have come home from a weeks trip, and logged them all at one time, without changing the default date. Honest mistake. Or not.

 

Some of the logs of course are much more general -- "thanks for the diversion" in getting to a very hard to reach waterfall or after a three mile hike to a peak. But some people are more eloquent in their logs than others, particularly when logging in a number of caches after a trip. And if it weren't for field notes, I would have no idea what day it is and perhaps not remember to change the default -- as it is, some of my signed logs are known to be off a day or two. I hope nobody makes that a forum topic.

Edited January 9, 2013 by geodarts

[+dakboy]

Will do. Hey, he's an older guy. Maybe he has to get the photo's scanned.

Or he has a digital camera, but his memory card failed/photos were lost (accidental format/deletion)/card went missing and he simply doesn't have the photos. I know I've been scouring my house for the last 3 evenings trying to find a memory card from a trip I took back in November (and I've had the other 2 happen to me as well).

Edited January 9, 2013 by dakboy

[+NeecesandNephews]

This ^^^ Reading the logs makes it seem like they were actually there. Could have come home from a weeks trip, and logged them all at one time, without changing the default date. Honest mistake. Or not.

 

Some of the logs of course are much more general -- "thanks for the diversion" in getting to a very hard to reach waterfall or after a three mile hike to a peak. But some people are more eloquent in their logs than others, particularly when logging in a number of caches after a trip. And if it weren't for field notes, I would have no idea what day it is and perhaps not remember to change the default -- as it is, some of my signed logs are known to be off a day or two. I hope nobody makes that a forum topic.

 

Agreed. I don't always take extra care to log caches on the correct date, but then I usuall log when I arrive home, so it hasn't been a problem.

The very first cache on the linked page does have some logs that are peculiar. Different finders, different dates, but they say "thanks for showing this place to my virtual tour" and no photos, which I read as a requirement for logging.

Interesting reading to say the least.

[+Corfman Clan]

Well, I'm hoping it is just a mix up with not using the correct dates. However, if I presume that all that were logged yesterday were found between then and when the previous finds were logged. That gives six days. I mentioned above that I wasn't sure if it could be done in a day with a helicopter. Well, I think it would be very difficult to do the AZ portion in six days. There are caches from all sides of the state and there's a big ditch and lots of mountains that makes travel between the areas difficult and time consuming. If the three CA caches that were also logged are thrown in, I figure it darn near impossible.

 

Also, was curious why they wouldn't have logged other virtuals that are easy stops that they would have driven right by when on this tour (Valentine's Bridge and Cliff Dweller stand out), so I checked to see if they had previously logged them. They hadn't. While doing that, I also noticed they had another tour through AZ last April, again with a very aggressive schedule.

[+Corfman Clan]

Interestingly enough, all his AZ finds from yesterday have been deleted. The three CA finds are still there. Taking a look at his AZ finds from last April, I imagine they should be deleted too.

[Mr.Yuck]

Interestingly enough, all his AZ finds from yesterday have been deleted. The three CA finds are still there. Taking a look at his AZ finds from last April, I imagine they should be deleted too.

 

All of them? I'd have to assume there are several different cache owners. How many finds were there in Arizona?

[+Corfman Clan]

All of them? I'd have to assume there are several different cache owners. How many finds were there in Arizona?

There was eleven finds deleted. Most, if not all of those are owned by cachers that have not been a part of the game for several years, so it wasn't the owners deleting the logs.

[Mr.Yuck]

All of them? I'd have to assume there are several different cache owners. How many finds were there in Arizona?

There was eleven finds deleted. Most, if not all of those are owned by cachers that have not been a part of the game for several years, so it wasn't the owners deleting the logs.

 

Oh. I did send an email, but he has not responded. He may have read it, but not responded. I was kind of leaning towards most Virtual owners are out of the game, and not monitoring the Virtuals. A fact I shouldn't publicize, reviewes have been known to archive them in such cases.