Geocaching "Cheaters"

[+Mrdlg2u]

It's probably a small case of OCD on my part. I'm trying to clear out everything within about a mile or two of my office. A few can't be done just yet (one is in a drainage ditch that I can't go into in my work clothes, two are challenges that will take a while for me to clear, one is a multi with one stage I can't find and am not sure is there).

Like I said, I'm planning to sign...just not worrying so much about updating the log.

 

I understand your thinking... I try to clear around my house, and see what I can get cleared on my lunch break...without being late getting back.

some of the "pine tree" and micros I don't sign. I am in it for the hunt.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

[+bflentje]

Confession time: A local LPC I've been trying to clear since I started caching. I know precisely where it is...only place it COULD be since it's literally in the middle of a giant parking lot and there is nothing else around to hide the cache on. I've tried about four times but every time there is someone either sitting in their car who can see me or people walking by. I really just don't want to put any more effort into an LPC, so I logged it and since then I actually have felt bad about it. And it's not even a fun cache! I'm probably going to try again to sign the log just so I can get it off my conscience. Sad, I know.

 

After giving it a fair chance to clear of muggles, I would have just went and found the cache regardless of who was watching. That's the breaks for hiding a cache in such a spot.

 

I've only cheated a couple of times in my 6 years. But NEVER on a cache better than a 2/2.

Edited February 27, 2013 by bflentje

[vagabond]

Confession time: A local LPC I've been trying to clear since I started caching. I know precisely where it is...only place it COULD be since it's literally in the middle of a giant parking lot and there is nothing else around to hide the cache on. I've tried about four times but every time there is someone either sitting in their car who can see me or people walking by. I really just don't want to put any more effort into an LPC, so I logged it and since then I actually have felt bad about it. And it's not even a fun cache! I'm probably going to try again to sign the log just so I can get it off my conscience. Sad, I know.

 

This is why most of my caching is done Sunday mornings starting about daylight

[+Don_J]

If Geocaching.com wanted to make it so you could not cheat, they would use a code that you could scan......

Oh wait, that system is already out there. If you don't scan or if you scan the code more then 50 ft from set location, it will not let you log the find.

I tried to scan something with my Montana but could not find the right button.

Time to upgrade lol

my phone is always in my pocket.

my caching bag does not always get into my car.

Later,

MrDLG2u

Upgrade? Why? Because you're worried about my find count? I think not.

No, I am not concerned about anyones counts... upgrade because its a new game

I never understood why anyone would cheat at something that is just for fun.

Kind of like cheating on the number of push-ups I do in my workout...

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

 

It's not a new game. You need to understand that while this game can be played with gps enabled smartpones, it is NOT a smartphone game, and hopefully it never will be.

[+Mrdlg2u]

It's not a new game. You need to understand that while this game can be played with gps enabled smartpones, it is NOT a smartphone game, and hopefully it never will be.

You are correct about one thing, it is not a new game. Pirates were great at treasure hunting. Look how far we have come...

What I do understand is that this is already a "smartphone game". Myself and many others use their smartphone more then the standalone GPS unit.

Another thing I "understand" is that things change and evolve... and I suppose when the smart phone goes out of style... Your game will go back to a standalone GPS game.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

[MickUpi]

I have often wondered if someone was cheating on some of my caches. I have never checked the logs and I never will. I have lots of better things to do. Mick

[+tozainamboku]

It's not a new game. You need to understand that while this game can be played with gps enabled smartpones, it is NOT a smartphone game, and hopefully it never will be.

You are correct about one thing, it is not a new game. Pirates were great at treasure hunting. Look how far we have come...

What I do understand is that this is already a "smartphone game". Myself and many others use their smartphone more then the standalone GPS unit.

Another thing I "understand" is that things change and evolve... and I suppose when the smart phone goes out of style... Your game will go back to a standalone GPS game.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

There are plenty of location based games that can be played on a smartphone. It may make sense that if Groundspeak says they're "The Language of Location" for them to pursue some of these. I believe that if Groundspeak had waited a few years and launched Wherigo as a smartphone app it would have been far more successful than it was when launched with insufficient hardware for it to be widely playable.

 

While Groundspeak can certainly expand into areas that require smartphones and compete with FourSquare, Munzee, and others; over the years they have learned that their bread and butter is in the simple geocaching game that was started 13 years ago. By keeping it simple to finding containers and a simple online find/dnf log, they can appeal to broadest group. While there have been some extensions such as multi-caches, puzzles, virtual caches, and EarthCaches, the more complex it gets the less successful it has been.

 

The majority of cachers (even those coming via a smartphone app) realize that point is have fun looking for caches. There are certainly some who play to get souvenirs or complete statistical accomplishments; but the majority are looking for caches because they enjoy getting outside and going to new places. Extraneous structure and complication to log finds would turn off many. I don't see a good reason to mess with the current system or to make logging dependent on any particular technology.

[+mzw00dy]

So then there is the person who says...Well its missing but since I have been there twice looking for it, I am marking it found even though It is not there....then the same person says, I have lookied x number of times and have not found this, but I am sure I was close so I am logging it found, and my favorite from said cacher. I can't find it so it must need maintenance. And then 20 people come along and find it, then he has the gall to say, well then I am logging it found cause I am sure I was at GZ and everyone else found it.. grrrrr

[+Mrdlg2u]

It's not a new game. You need to understand that while this game can be played with gps enabled smartpones, it is NOT a smartphone game, and hopefully it never will be.

You are correct about one thing, it is not a new game. Pirates were great at treasure hunting. Look how far we have come...

What I do understand is that this is already a "smartphone game". Myself and many others use their smartphone more then the standalone GPS unit.

Another thing I "understand" is that things change and evolve... and I suppose when the smart phone goes out of style... Your game will go back to a standalone GPS game.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

There are plenty of location based games that can be played on a smartphone. It may make sense that if Groundspeak says they're "The Language of Location" for them to pursue some of these. I believe that if Groundspeak had waited a few years and launched Wherigo as a smartphone app it would have been far more successful than it was when launched with insufficient hardware for it to be widely playable.

 

While Groundspeak can certainly expand into areas that require smartphones and compete with FourSquare, Munzee, and others; over the years they have learned that their bread and butter is in the simple geocaching game that was started 13 years ago. By keeping it simple to finding containers and a simple online find/dnf log, they can appeal to broadest group. While there have been some extensions such as multi-caches, puzzles, virtual caches, and EarthCaches, the more complex it gets the less successful it has been.

 

The majority of cachers (even those coming via a smartphone app) realize that point is have fun looking for caches. There are certainly some who play to get souvenirs or complete statistical accomplishments; but the majority are looking for caches because they enjoy getting outside and going to new places. Extraneous structure and complication to log finds would turn off many. I don't see a good reason to mess with the current system or to make logging dependent on any particular technology.

Those are great points I had forgotten about Wherigo. I think there is a good app now.

I don't think the current system should be changed either, but maybe just added to. logging on paper should stay the same. But add the option to be able to scan the cache... it would be another way to prove you found a cache. (Hey, I am back on topic now LOL)

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

[+Mrdlg2u]

So then there is the person who says...Well its missing but since I have been there twice looking for it, I am marking it found even though It is not there....then the same person says, I have lookied x number of times and have not found this, but I am sure I was close so I am logging it found, and my favorite from said cacher. I can't find it so it must need maintenance. And then 20 people come along and find it, then he has the gall to say, well then I am logging it found cause I am sure I was at GZ and everyone else found it.. grrrrr

Yes, people justify doing it a lot of different ways. I always thought it was silly.

I have one that I can not find... I drive by it every day. I have looked 4 times and still not able to get it closed. so it stays on my map. it is annoying, but I am not going to mark it as found.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

[+MartyBartfast]

So then there is the person who says...Well its missing but since I have been there twice looking for it, I am marking it found even though It is not there....then the same person says, I have lookied x number of times and have not found this, but I am sure I was close so I am logging it found, and my favorite from said cacher. I can't find it so it must need maintenance. And then 20 people come along and find it, then he has the gall to say, well then I am logging it found cause I am sure I was at GZ and everyone else found it.. grrrrr

Yes, people justify doing it a lot of different ways. I always thought it was silly.

I have one that I can not find... I drive by it every day. I have looked 4 times and still not able to get it closed. so it stays on my map. it is annoying, but I am not going to mark it as found.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

 

you can always add them to your "ignore" list.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

So then there is the person who says...Well its missing but since I have been there twice looking for it, I am marking it found even though It is not there....then the same person says, I have lookied x number of times and have not found this, but I am sure I was close so I am logging it found, and my favorite from said cacher. I can't find it so it must need maintenance. And then 20 people come along and find it, then he has the gall to say, well then I am logging it found cause I am sure I was at GZ and everyone else found it.. grrrrr

Yes, people justify doing it a lot of different ways. I always thought it was silly.

I have one that I can not find... I drive by it every day. I have looked 4 times and still not able to get it closed. so it stays on my map. it is annoying, but I am not going to mark it as found.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

 

you can always add them to your "ignore" list.

 

It doesn't sound like Mrdlg2u wants to ignore that cache.

 

There was one that I used to drive by twice every day while dropping my son off to school. I was the first to DNF it, and searched for it 3 more times, spending over 3 hours at ground zero before I finally found it.

 

I don't have *any* caches on my ignore list. My feeling is that I can remember which caches I don't really care to find. I've seen other suggest ignoring caches that are very difficult to find or have a really difficult puzzle. While putting a "hard" cache on an ignore list might remove it from the map, it's still out there, and I know it's still out there.

 

I see it like taking a test and "ignoring" the question I can't answer then claiming to have achieve a perfect score on the test.

[+CanadianRockies]

I don't have *any* caches on my ignore list. My feeling is that I can remember which caches I don't really care to find. I've seen other suggest ignoring caches that are very difficult to find or have a really difficult puzzle. While putting a "hard" cache on an ignore list might remove it from the map, it's still out there, and I know it's still out there.

But there's no requirement that you have to find every cache that is still out there. If you opt not to find a cache for any reason, then the Ignore List can be a useful option.

 

I see it like taking a test and "ignoring" the question I can't answer then claiming to have achieve a perfect score on the test.

Unlike a test, nobody is grading you on how many caches you find. And I don't know anybody who has ever claimed to have a perfect geocaching score.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I don't have *any* caches on my ignore list. My feeling is that I can remember which caches I don't really care to find. I've seen other suggest ignoring caches that are very difficult to find or have a really difficult puzzle. While putting a "hard" cache on an ignore list might remove it from the map, it's still out there, and I know it's still out there.

But there's no requirement that you have to find every cache that is still out there. If you opt not to find a cache for any reason, then the Ignore List can be a useful option.

 

I see it like taking a test and "ignoring" the question I can't answer then claiming to have achieve a perfect score on the test.

Unlike a test, nobody is grading you on how many caches you find. And I don't know anybody who has ever claimed to have a perfect geocaching score.

 

I'm not suggesting that one has to find every cache, but using an ignore list feels too much like putting my fingers in my ears and yelling "I can't hear your".

 

Although I haven't seen anyone claiming to have a perfect score, I have seen posts where someone wrote that they had cleared out the caches within a certain radius except for caches on their ignore list.

[+MartyBartfast]

Just throwing it in as a suggestion. The only caches I've had on my ignore list were 3 local events which I didn't get to but which were left active long after the event date had passed. I got sick of looking at the map and thinking there was a new event nearby so stuck them on the list and they went away.

[+Don_J]

So then there is the person who says...Well its missing but since I have been there twice looking for it, I am marking it found even though It is not there....then the same person says, I have lookied x number of times and have not found this, but I am sure I was close so I am logging it found, and my favorite from said cacher. I can't find it so it must need maintenance. And then 20 people come along and find it, then he has the gall to say, well then I am logging it found cause I am sure I was at GZ and everyone else found it.. grrrrr

Yes, people justify doing it a lot of different ways. I always thought it was silly.

I have one that I can not find... I drive by it every day. I have looked 4 times and still not able to get it closed. so it stays on my map. it is annoying, but I am not going to mark it as found.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

 

you can always add them to your "ignore" list.

 

It doesn't sound like Mrdlg2u wants to ignore that cache.

 

There was one that I used to drive by twice every day while dropping my son off to school. I was the first to DNF it, and searched for it 3 more times, spending over 3 hours at ground zero before I finally found it.

 

I don't have *any* caches on my ignore list. My feeling is that I can remember which caches I don't really care to find. I've seen other suggest ignoring caches that are very difficult to find or have a really difficult puzzle. While putting a "hard" cache on an ignore list might remove it from the map, it's still out there, and I know it's still out there.

 

I see it like taking a test and "ignoring" the question I can't answer then claiming to have achieve a perfect score on the test.

 

Interesting. I ignore caches that I don't care to find because I don't want them in my PQs and I'd rather they not clutter up the map. Clearing a radius is not one of my goals and hiding an icon and then proclaiming that I cleared my map just seems silly. Do people do that? As far as cheating. I started in May of '05 and last week I finally found the third cache I ever looked for. I figure I have invested a good 6-7 hours looking for this thing over the years while it was racking up plenty of found logs, including one that said, "Our first cache, it was easy". It never occurred to me to log a find because I simply looked in the place where they hid it.

[+mzw00dy]

So then there is the person who says...Well its missing but since I have been there twice looking for it, I am marking it found even though It is not there....then the same person says, I have lookied x number of times and have not found this, but I am sure I was close so I am logging it found, and my favorite from said cacher. I can't find it so it must need maintenance. And then 20 people come along and find it, then he has the gall to say, well then I am logging it found cause I am sure I was at GZ and everyone else found it.. grrrrr

Yes, people justify doing it a lot of different ways. I always thought it was silly.

I have one that I can not find... I drive by it every day. I have looked 4 times and still not able to get it closed. so it stays on my map. it is annoying, but I am not going to mark it as found.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

 

you can always add them to your "ignore" list.

 

It doesn't sound like Mrdlg2u wants to ignore that cache.

 

There was one that I used to drive by twice every day while dropping my son off to school. I was the first to DNF it, and searched for it 3 more times, spending over 3 hours at ground zero before I finally found it.

 

I don't have *any* caches on my ignore list. My feeling is that I can remember which caches I don't really care to find. I've seen other suggest ignoring caches that are very difficult to find or have a really difficult puzzle. While putting a "hard" cache on an ignore list might remove it from the map, it's still out there, and I know it's still out there.

 

I see it like taking a test and "ignoring" the question I can't answer then claiming to have achieve a perfect score on the test.

MrGLD2u

 

Interesting. I ignore caches that I don't care to find because I don't want them in my PQs and I'd rather they not clutter up the map. Clearing a radius is not one of my goals and hiding an icon and then proclaiming that I cleared my map just seems silly. Do people do that? As far as cheating. I started in May of '05 and last week I finally found the third cache I ever looked for. I figure I have invested a good 6-7 hours looking for this thing over the years while it was racking up plenty of found logs, including one that said, "Our first cache, it was easy". It never occurred to me to log a find because I simply looked in the place where they hid it.

 

Its not the cache that is the problem for me...its the cacher...they do this alot and cause problems by claiming a Note saying lost and saying cache needs maintenance. They unfortunatly live close to me...They must, they find alot of the ones close. I am just venting. I am like MrDGL2u when I can't find it I keep looking...those are the watchlisters. I found one on a Saturday cache run owned by said caher...My mistake saying I found it. Got an email next day grilling me on if it was still at the right coords. Really? Sorry for the vent.

Edited March 24, 2013 by mzw00dy

[+mzw00dy]

Go and check all of the other caches they have found within a 50 mile radius, and compile a dossier with the results. Make about 1000 copies and pass them out at the next few events during a fake finder fact finder meeting. Notify the local geocouncil to have their certification voided, and then notify the police to have them charged with fraud. Next, conduct a thorough interrogation to see if they have read, or own any media by the leftist tozamboku organization.

 

I like that idea...hahaha...just kidding.

[+oxford comma]

So then there is the person who says...Well its missing but since I have been there twice looking for it, I am marking it found even though It is not there....then the same person says, I have lookied x number of times and have not found this, but I am sure I was close so I am logging it found, and my favorite from said cacher. I can't find it so it must need maintenance. And then 20 people come along and find it, then he has the gall to say, well then I am logging it found cause I am sure I was at GZ and everyone else found it.. grrrrr

Yes, people justify doing it a lot of different ways. I always thought it was silly.

I have one that I can not find... I drive by it every day. I have looked 4 times and still not able to get it closed. so it stays on my map. it is annoying, but I am not going to mark it as found.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

 

you can always add them to your "ignore" list.

 

It doesn't sound like Mrdlg2u wants to ignore that cache.

 

There was one that I used to drive by twice every day while dropping my son off to school. I was the first to DNF it, and searched for it 3 more times, spending over 3 hours at ground zero before I finally found it.

 

I don't have *any* caches on my ignore list. My feeling is that I can remember which caches I don't really care to find. I've seen other suggest ignoring caches that are very difficult to find or have a really difficult puzzle. While putting a "hard" cache on an ignore list might remove it from the map, it's still out there, and I know it's still out there.

 

I see it like taking a test and "ignoring" the question I can't answer then claiming to have achieve a perfect score on the test.

MrGLD2u

 

Interesting. I ignore caches that I don't care to find because I don't want them in my PQs and I'd rather they not clutter up the map. Clearing a radius is not one of my goals and hiding an icon and then proclaiming that I cleared my map just seems silly. Do people do that? As far as cheating. I started in May of '05 and last week I finally found the third cache I ever looked for. I figure I have invested a good 6-7 hours looking for this thing over the years while it was racking up plenty of found logs, including one that said, "Our first cache, it was easy". It never occurred to me to log a find because I simply looked in the place where they hid it.

 

Its not the cache that is the problem for me...its the cacher...they do this alot and cause problems by claiming a Note saying lost and saying cache needs maintenance. They unfortunatly live close to me...They must, they find alot of the ones close. I am just venting. I am like MrDGL2u when I can't find it I keep looking...those are the watchlisters. I found one on a Saturday cache run owned by said caher...My mistake saying I found it. Got an email next day grilling me on if it was still at the right coords. Really? Sorry for the vent.

are you saying that you're irritated the CO dropped you , the most recent finder, a line to inquire as to the current location of the cache ... to see if its still at the original GZ and hads not migrated elsewhere? if so, I don't see why that's such an annoying thing. or are you pissed about people assuming that since THEY can't find it the cache MUST be missing. ?

[Clan Riffster]

 

As far as "the only place it could be hidden" goes, I know of a cache where the coordinates lead you to a lamp post in a parking lot with no other features that could obviously be used to hide the cache. It's not in the lamp post. There's a creek bed and tunnel that runs underneath the parking lot where the cache is actually hidden. There are a lot of DNF and NM logs on the cache from people that assumed that "it must be missing".

 

Well, since the Hint is "Look closely... under the skirt", I think it's safe to say it's hidden under the pole base cover.

Ya know, in the example given by NYPaddleCacher, the hint would still apply.

Cuz', technically, the cache in the tunnel is under the skirt. Several feet under, I imagine.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I was looking at the list of my recent finds, and noticed for a fairly tough mystery cache, the most recent find was on 10/21/2011 (the day before it was published). Curious, I checked that cacher's finds. The cacher has been a member since March of this year, and has logged 187 finds (all with "found it"). 100 since becoming a member. The remainder were logged for a date before becoming a member. Including 30 found in 2011. Cacher does not appear to be a member of a team and relogging, since no other finds were logged the same day as many of the finds.

Curious.

[team tisri]

I'm curious to know if anyone out there has known about someone who logged a cache as found but didn't actually find it? What do you do when this happens?

 

The only time I cared was when I wanted to use a cache to qualify for a resuscitator cache. It had been found about 13 months previously, and then about three months previously. The previous finder said they didn't have a pen so didn't sign the log, but when I found it there was a pen in the cache and a TB the previous finder could have taken to prove they found it. I queried their find and it was subsequently deleted.

 

Unless someone cheating affects me in some way I really couldn't care less. I've claimed finds on some caches having not signed the log book (but with some other proof I found the cache) and to some people that's cheating.

[+FraenCache]

I think this game is basically for your own experience, going outside, searching and finding. That whole other aspect of smileys on your web profile, statistics, listings, souveniers and all that electronic side show crap should not influence the over all experience too much, does it? At least that´s my point of view. I couldn´t care less about people ignoring the fun and real life aspect of this game just to sit in front of their computer and cheat to get some smiling pixels on their screen. I cache to get out and about, to me that´s what this all is about and I really don´t bother about the virtual part of it. Why should I? There´s so much competition in our lives going on at work and everywhere, I don´t need that in my spare time as well. Why do things have to get so serious all the time ...

[+Mrdlg2u]

...... Why do things have to get so serious all the time ...

I like the tech stuff. That makes it more fun for me.

But, the bottom line is getting out and looking around. Its something to do with the kids... whilst they will still hang around with me. LOL

I also build and fly Remote Control planes, you would not believe how serious and competitive get about that...

Things people say in "forums", they would never bring up in real life.

 

Later,

Gundy

[7rxc]

It's not a new game. You need to understand that while this game can be played with gps enabled smartpones, it is NOT a smartphone game, and hopefully it never will be.

You are correct about one thing, it is not a new game. Pirates were great at treasure hunting. Look how far we have come...

What I do understand is that this is already a "smartphone game". Myself and many others use their smartphone more then the standalone GPS unit.

Another thing I "understand" is that things change and evolve... and I suppose when the smart phone goes out of style... Your game will go back to a standalone GPS game.

 

Later,

MrDLG2u

 

Since you feel this is a smartphone game already. Try turning off the GPS function completely and hunt for a few in the woods or other non wide open area. No using clear air photos... That is why the restriction on open landscapes. Just you and the smartphone, I don't restrict air photos and maps though other than the ones that show a large object in an open field. Have to be fair. You can use tower triangulation if you want to.

 

After your hunt minus any GPS involvement, see how you feel.

 

Doug 7rxc

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I've never compared one of my cache logs to online logs and don't intend to. That's not fun for me, and I hide caches for fun. The only time I have deleted logs is when someone wrote a warning in my forum that someone was armchair logging caches in my area. I checked and sure enough he had logged two of mine, so I deleted them. If it's not specifically called to my attention as a problem I don't look for it. My experience has been that the vast majority of cachers are good honest people and I don't need to be a cache cop.

[7rxc]

On the subject of 'cheaters'... some forms can be a two edged sword. Drop downs are bad idea and greedy. Giving away puzzle coordinates, photo spoilers and PAFs are really repulsive for me anyway. I'm in this to find caches, not be coddled. All I want are good coordinates, some sort of goal (the search, or a puzzle, or some sort of physical challenge) to achieve, and some reward (the cache, the views, even an FTF or similar minor item).

 

The downside of this can be the people who depend on the 'cheat'. I know of one cache where they often do the PAF thing... depending on someone who found the cache years ago to tell them where it is and how to find it. Problem is that that information is not current. When they do find it eventually (if they bother) it is usually because someone else did find it and 'returned' it to it's no longer correct location, and I have to put it back for them.

The location changes every now and then to avoid muggles... sometimes the cachers are even worse. Then there are cachers who 'cheat' on their placements... This area is hard to get 'good' coordinate sets... that is you cannot depend on a single 'mark' of a waypoint. It can take many attempts to get a reliable average. Who are they cheating? Their caches don't get found easily, when they get found it's often way off for the finder since their GPS has stabilized but shows the location way off the original. This leads to getting a reputation for soft coordinates and thus perhaps being 'ignore listed'. So it's not just finders that cheat someone, you can do it to yourself as well.

 

Doug 7rxc

[+thebruce0]

Sidetrack!

It's not a new game. You need to understand that while this game can be played with gps enabled smartpones, it is NOT a smartphone game, and hopefully it never will be.

You are correct about one thing, it is not a new game. Pirates were great at treasure hunting. Look how far we have come...

What I do understand is that this is already a "smartphone game". Myself and many others use their smartphone more then the standalone GPS unit.

Another thing I "understand" is that things change and evolve... and I suppose when the smart phone goes out of style... Your game will go back to a standalone GPS game.

Since you feel this is a smartphone game already. Try turning off the GPS function completely and hunt for a few in the woods or other non wide open area. No using clear air photos... That is why the restriction on open landscapes. Just you and the smartphone, I don't restrict air photos and maps though other than the ones that show a large object in an open field. Have to be fair. You can use tower triangulation if you want to.

 

To be clear, it's not a "smartphone game", and it's not a "handheld GPSr game". It's just a game that makes use of GPS technology -- For any device that supports GPS technology. That means handhelds and smartphones are equally as important, useful, feasible, and acceptable. It's how you use the device, and the technical capability of your device - handheld OR smartphone (both exist across the spectrum). I'm really starting to greatly detest this ongoing "GPSr" vs "Smartphone" debate.

 

Don_J: "hopefully it never will be" - if/when any handheld device other than a dedicated GPSr has technology that surpasses them, or is at least sufficient to play the game (we're already here), then yes, it will be. Accept that. Play with whatever device you want, and let anyone else play with the device they want.

 

Mrdlg2u: It's only a smartphone game in that people can use a smartphone. Handhelds on average are still more capable than smartphones on average. So it's not time (yet?) to declare this a "smartphone game" -- Smartphone-capable, yes.

 

Now back to the topic at hand...

 

For cheaters, I think it's right ultimately not to take it to heart personally, because it is just a game. But cheaters can and do affect the experience for others, if posting bogus or fake logs. Many view a cache's log history as an indication of its status or the experience one might have in seeking it, or for hints and tips and whatnot. If the CO doesn't maintain the integrity of their cache history, then it can most definitely ruin the fun of the game for other cachers. The potential is there.

That, along with the perspective of 'encouraging cheating by being apathetic about it' are why, depending on my cache, I may be more proactive about bogus logging.

 

Intentionally bad logs are rare, barely happens at all, mistakes moreso, but as a CO I feel it is at least to some degree my responsibility to make sure my cache history(ies) are as accurate to the intended experience as to my satisfaction, keeping in mind the wide range of experience and determination of cachers that may attempt to find them (beginners to vets, to intelligent to slow).

 

One that really really angered me was a local prolific and 'respected' cacher who purposefully trespassed to complete a 5 terrain cache, and posted photos to the find log, that weren't his, and lied about the entire experience. The owners of the cache knew that the only way to find the final was by water, lest you trespass. Not only did they lie in the find log, they trespassed, cheated, googled and used someone else's photos, and on top of that, signed people's names in who expressly didn't want their names in the log sheet because they didn't get the cache properly.

That was deplorable. That is not something that should be acceptable. 1) it encourages blatant cheating 2) it misrepresents the cache 3) in this case it was technically illegal.

Granted that's on the high end of the "cheating" spectrum, but it just goes to show what people can do if a blind eye is turned towards the act.

 

Ultimately, I think it's a case by case scenario, but you can't just play the ignorance card and not care about it at all. It is just a game, but it's a game we all enjoy together. Let's try to encourage, and to keep, a high standard.

Edited August 13, 2013 by thebruce0

[+Don_J]

Sidetrack!

It's not a new game. You need to understand that while this game can be played with gps enabled smartpones, it is NOT a smartphone game, and hopefully it never will be.

You are correct about one thing, it is not a new game. Pirates were great at treasure hunting. Look how far we have come...

What I do understand is that this is already a "smartphone game". Myself and many others use their smartphone more then the standalone GPS unit.

Another thing I "understand" is that things change and evolve... and I suppose when the smart phone goes out of style... Your game will go back to a standalone GPS game.

Since you feel this is a smartphone game already. Try turning off the GPS function completely and hunt for a few in the woods or other non wide open area. No using clear air photos... That is why the restriction on open landscapes. Just you and the smartphone, I don't restrict air photos and maps though other than the ones that show a large object in an open field. Have to be fair. You can use tower triangulation if you want to.

 

To be clear, it's not a "smartphone game", and it's not a "handheld GPSr game". It's just a game that makes use of GPS technology -- For any device that supports GPS technology. That means handhelds and smartphones are equally as important, useful, feasible, and acceptable. It's how you use the device, and the technical capability of your device - handheld OR smartphone (both exist across the spectrum). I'm really starting to greatly detest this ongoing "GPSr" vs "Smartphone" debate.

 

Don_J: "hopefully it never will be" - if/when any handheld device other than a dedicated GPSr has technology that surpasses them, or is at least sufficient to play the game (we're already here), then yes, it will be. Accept that. Play with whatever device you want, and let anyone else play with the device they want.

 

Mrdlg2u: It's only a smartphone game in that people can use a smartphone. Handhelds on average are still more capable than smartphones on average. So it's not time (yet?) to declare this a "smartphone game" -- Smartphone-capable, yes.

 

 

Sorry, I can't accept that because it isn't true. Just because a game can be played on a smartphone does not mean that it is a smartphone game. "Angry Birds" is a smartphone game. The bar code game with the unspeakable name is a smartphone game.

 

Saying that Geocaching is a smartphone game would be like saying that Chess is a smartphone game. As long as I can place a board on the table and set up the pieces, it is not a smartphone game.

[+thebruce0]

Sorry, I can't accept that because it isn't true. Just because a game can be played on a smartphone does not mean that it is a smartphone game. "Angry Birds" is a smartphone game. The bar code game with the unspeakable name is a smartphone game.

 

Saying that Geocaching is a smartphone game would be like saying that Chess is a smartphone game. As long as I can place a board on the table and set up the pieces, it is not a smartphone game.

Dude, did you read my post? I said it isn't a smartphone game. It's a smartphone-capable game. The only kind of native game it is, is GPS-enabled devices. That's it.

[+Mrdlg2u]

Sidetrack!

It's not a new game. You need to understand that while this game can be played with gps enabled smartpones, it is NOT a smartphone game, and hopefully it never will be.

You are correct about one thing, it is not a new game. Pirates were great at treasure hunting. Look how far we have come...

What I do understand is that this is already a "smartphone game". Myself and many others use their smartphone more then the standalone GPS unit.

Another thing I "understand" is that things change and evolve... and I suppose when the smart phone goes out of style... Your game will go back to a standalone GPS game.

Since you feel this is a smartphone game already. Try turning off the GPS function completely and hunt for a few in the woods or other non wide open area. No using clear air photos... That is why the restriction on open landscapes. Just you and the smartphone, I don't restrict air photos and maps though other than the ones that show a large object in an open field. Have to be fair. You can use tower triangulation if you want to.

 

To be clear, it's not a "smartphone game", and it's not a "handheld GPSr game". It's just a game that makes use of GPS technology -- For any device that supports GPS technology. That means handhelds and smartphones are equally as important, useful, feasible, and acceptable. It's how you use the device, and the technical capability of your device - handheld OR smartphone (both exist across the spectrum). I'm really starting to greatly detest this ongoing "GPSr" vs "Smartphone" debate.

 

Don_J: "hopefully it never will be" - if/when any handheld device other than a dedicated GPSr has technology that surpasses them, or is at least sufficient to play the game (we're already here), then yes, it will be. Accept that. Play with whatever device you want, and let anyone else play with the device they want.

 

Mrdlg2u: It's only a smartphone game in that people can use a smartphone. Handhelds on average are still more capable than smartphones on average. So it's not time (yet?) to declare this a "smartphone game" -- Smartphone-capable, yes.

 

 

Sorry, I can't accept that because it isn't true. Just because a game can be played on a smartphone does not mean that it is a smartphone game. "Angry Birds" is a smartphone game. The bar code game with the unspeakable name is a smartphone game.

 

Saying that Geocaching is a smartphone game would be like saying that Chess is a smartphone game. As long as I can place a board on the table and set up the pieces, it is not a smartphone game.

WOW... no one said it was a "smartphone only game".

I use my GPS Handheld when I have it along. If something new comes along that a can input GPS data into... I may use that as well.

 

Back to cheating:

No matter what game it is, people will take it to seriously, and have to get the "upper hand".

Not every game is a competition.

 

Later,

Gundy

 

Hey, I just found an app for my phone to play chess...

[JASTA 11]

We had one on a cache of ours recently.

 

The cache is located under a bridge, and is only accessable with a boat at high tide. Here's the log:

 

The bridge is closed so have to walk it. Lots of muggles around, but still able to use stealth and getterdone! Thanks for the smiley! (This guy had over 2000 finds at the time)

 

So instead of deleting it, I emailed him something like this:

 

Wow! Congrats on finding Xxxxx Xxxx. You have got to post how you did managed to reach reach the cache from the bridge. Everyone else who's found it has had to use a boat. We can't wait to read about how you did it!

 

He never replied to the email, but he did delete the find.

[7rxc]

From the pics it looks doable from the top, but it is really hard to tell from the available photos. I think a rope rescue type could with the right gear, and after watching one in Finland that looked more difficult that was actually free climbed I think that might be possible too. Still a T5 either way... but the sea approach is likely the most practicable. The logs say even that wasn't too easy.. too bad I'm not likely to ever get there, but then I'm getting too old for that sort of thing these days. Looks fun! Local regs of course might prevent doing the top down scenario or attract too much attention.

 

Doug 7rxc

[+4hardys.calm]

I had a log on my mystery cache, and its a good fun mystery cache, every one had left a nice log about it, this one was short, basically just a thanks, so I check the answer checker, and no one has tried to guess it in weeks, then I check the cache to see if it was signed, and nope, nothing since the last find over a month ago. So I check the persons profile, seems like they have logged finds all over the place in a short period of time. for example: Spain, Alaska, and Rzeczpospolita Polska all on the same day, lol. 10 souvenirs from different countries and states in less then a month.

 

https://www.geocaching.com/profile/?guid=4e874624-3952-4dea-94c0-f116b009330a

 

So I deleted their log.

 

what the point in cheating at this game

[+Clarkbowman]

Generally another Margarita.

 

^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[+Meow&Purr]

Confession time: A local LPC I've been trying to clear since I started caching. I know precisely where it is...only place it COULD be since it's literally in the middle of a giant parking lot and there is nothing else around to hide the cache on. I've tried about four times but every time there is someone either sitting in their car who can see me or people walking by. I really just don't want to put any more effort into an LPC, so I logged it and since then I actually have felt bad about it. And it's not even a fun cache! I'm probably going to try again to sign the log just so I can get it off my conscience. Sad, I know.

 

If you feel you really must find that cache go after it before or after normal business hours when you're less likely going to encounter people in cars or walking through the parking lot.

 

Or, just go up the skirt, lift it, grab the cache and sign the log. Don't worry about who may see you. Act like you belong there and are doing somehting you shoudl be.

 

That's what I do these days. No issues yet.

 

I have a reflective vest and other gear that I've been known to wear for these things. At one cache, the log was hidden under a huge carving of a bear at the entrance to a diner on a busy road in full view of the dining patio...

I donned my vest and walked up like I belonged. The tube was shoved WAY up under the bear and I had to spend considerable time retrieving it. A guy came up and asked "So I'm wondering what a 'bear technician' does out here" I made up an elaborate story about checking the base and such. He nodded, agreed, and walked off not enlightened about the work of a 'bear technician' Found the log and got the heck out of there...

[+boothie103]

Subject Cheaters.

I do not give a rats backside, note the politeness, if some low life cheats by claiming it has found one of my caches. The reason being is that low life has to live with it's lie! And please note, I was politically correct by calling them low life and not bottom dwellers, bottom feeders or scum suckers!

It's a game that relies on honesty and if you can't be honest with yourself, why play it?

[+bflentje]

Subject Cheaters.

I do not give a rats backside, note the politeness, if some low life cheats by claiming it has found one of my caches. The reason being is that low life has to live with it's lie! And please note, I was politically correct by calling them low life and not bottom dwellers, bottom feeders or scum suckers!

It's a game that relies on honesty and if you can't be honest with yourself, why play it?

 

But cheaters play the game and have no problem living with their conscience. Therefore, if someone OUTRIGHT lies a find on my caches, delete. And that's my opinion, and nothing you can say about it being a game will change my mind. Not to be mistaken for being flexible with issues like no pen, frozen, etc.

[+Mrdlg2u]

Wow, way to bring bring back this old thread.

Here is a new twist on "cheating".

I was in Kwick trip over the weekend, and heard 2 woman talking about "Did find any others", "looking for it..." and "have never been able to find that one..." and "we looked for a long time, and still dident find it..."

I knew what they were talking about, not that I am eavesdropping on every conversation I hear, But...

So one of the women told the other exactly where "it" was!!!

I leaned over and told them "Hey, That takes all the fun out of it."

 

To which the first women said: "Ya, but now I can check the dadgum thing off of my list!"

 

We all all laughed and went our separate ways.

 

Later,

Gundy

 

P.S. I had already found one they were talking about

[+thebruce0]

Wow, way to bring bring back this old thread.

Here is a new twist on "cheating".

 

I wouldn't call that new.

I'd wager that has been happening since the dawn of geocaching.

[+justintim1999]

Only a new cacher that found the first stage of a 5 stage multi can claimed the find. Wasn't cheating they just didn't understand how a multi worked.