INTRO APP users are killing the hobby

[+Team Microdot]

It's a very, very long thread and I'm not inclined to re-read the whole thing.

 

My last post pretty much encapsulates my viewpoint - although I would have to agree based on memory that there's probably a fair degree of alignment between our viewpoints in terms of desirable outcomes, although not necessarily the how's and why's that go along with them.

You're missing out on a lot of good discussion, and some very good ideas if all you're going to do is stubbornly not take the time to remind yourself what others have been saying on the subject.

Also, with a chip on your shoulder about where Groundspeak spends its energy for expanding or improving the game and gameplay, this isn't going to be an easy concept to swallow--the idea that we might want to look at this from their side of the fence.

 

Anyway, postitive and/or constructive discussions seem to get the attention of the Lackeys more than overly negaive or disgruntled ones.

 

Ah - so because I have an opinion which differs from yours I'm not only stubborn - I have a chip on my shoulder

 

And you're trying to educate me on positive / constructive discussion? Really? It's important to remember of course that dialogue is a two way process which doesn't depend on parties agreeing on everything.

 

Where Groundspeak spends its energy for improving those parts of the game and gameplay they can influence is up to them - and the very best of luck to them.

 

Asking me to keep quiet about where I would like to see them spend their energy though is almost as rich as expecting me to re-read the entire thread just because you think I should.

 

You might be happier to know I have the thread on my watch list so I've read pretty much every post - so I think I'm fairly up to speed with most of what's gone on. Hopefully that's OK with you but if it's not - that's cool too

yawn...

 

Bravo! I take it all back - I was on the fence there for a while but with that powerful and compelling riposte you've utterly convinced me. Positive? Constructive? Give me strength!

[+Glenn]

, I found the "can't be stolen or damaged beyond use" part more unlikely. I can't imagine a geocache that could be secured in such a way.

I agree. This is why think that it is important first to limit which caches are available in the intro app and then to label the caches which are available in such a way that those using the website know which caches are available to the intro app. This will allow geocaches to make a more informed decision on which caches they choose to leave travel bugs in and it will allow the cache owner to be prepared for the extra maintenance that comes with having a cache that is available via the intro app. Some way of contacting the intro app user either directly through the intro app or through a valid email address is essential. It will allow experienced geocachers to reach out and mentor those trying out geocaching. For example of an intro app user picks up a travel bug but doesn't know what to do with it, we will have a way of contacting them to help them out.

[+SirDonB]

There is this neat little feature when you search for caches. On the page that lists them before you click on map location, at the bottom there is a check box that will highlight the caches that have been determined good for beginners green. It should not be too hard to incorporate that into the app.

[4wheelin_fool]

It would be a rather nice feature if the intro app just listed caches on the other sites.

Edited November 23, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+thebruce0]

So, the Intro app users want and need an app that gives them geocaches. Enough of them that they can whet their appetite for more of this game. That's the "highlighted beginner caches" they see within the app. Our counter to that part is to update the beginner caches to exclude micros.

First, why micros? Plenty of micros are beginner-friendly. The idea of excluding micros to me seems like a very opinion-based call from the segment that deplores micros.

That said, there's a better chance that there are 'nicer' caches that aren't micros. But it's entirely region- and opinion-dependent. I don't think "exclude micros" as a blanket rule is fair.

 

There is this neat little feature when you search for caches. On the page that lists them before you click on map location, at the bottom there is a check box that will highlight the caches that have been determined good for beginners green. It should not be too hard to incorporate that into the app.

 

Basically what I was describing earlier. A point-based beginner-friendly system like favorites. Look back a page or two and read my post.

 

On that thought, the comment about reading back is very helpful. "I haven't read all the posts" doesn't really help in the long run. If it's too many pages, then just read the last two or three to get caught up - especially this thread which gets a couple of pages every couple of days

[Clan Riffster]

So, the Intro app users want and need an app that gives them geocaches. Enough of them that they can whet their appetite for more of this game. That's the "highlighted beginner caches" they see within the app. Our counter to that part is to update the beginner caches to exclude micros.

First, why micros?

Quite often we see posts in here from newer players, expressing frustration at not being able to find a cache. The replies to these posts almost always have a common theme; hunt something a bit larger until your geosense kicks in. Looking at this from a marketing perspective, Groundspeak, (hopefully), has, as it's goal, convincing the users of the Intro App to become premium members. Establishing a process which provides the user with a fun experience, whilst taking steps to limit frustration, goes a long way toward providing more carrot and less stick.

 

Going back to the carrot/stick analogy, by using tutorial pop ups, within the Intro App, Groundspeak could tell the new players that there are more challenging caches out there, (micros/nanos, higher D/T ratings, etc), available with the full app. Those users who want to up their game, so to speak, would be given the incentive to do so. Further tutorial pop ups could whet the player's interest by mentioning multi caches, puzzle caches, earth caches, etc.

[+thebruce0]

Oh I know of the "hatred" of micros. The rest of my comment you left out addressed that.

Again: Not all micros are bad, or beginner-unfriendly. Even though there's a better chance of friendly caches larger than micros. It's region- and opinion-dependent. Excluding micros has collateral effect: reduces greatly the number of urban caches (regardless of your opinion about those), and areas that may actually have good hiders of micro caches. Thus, it's presumptuous and unfair to "exclude all micros". It's a vague blanket bandaid that may benefit some areas and do exactly the opposite as intended in others. That was the point I was making above.

eg, new player boots the intro app in the downtown core, finds the nearest "beginner" cache 20km away, outside the city - not knowing that there are actually 10 available within a couple of blocks of where they're standing that are easy and quick finds. Regardless of your opinion of cache types, that's not very beginner friendly (unless you're trying to further the agenda that "good" geocaches are only outside the city in woods and somewhat large containers).

Today there are many regional geocaching styles (worldwide, even) to address in an 'intro' app that could ideally be booted up anywhere in the world - from urban cores to wilderness, from dense areas to sparse, from traditional-heavy regions to puzzle or challenge-heavy regions.

 

The bigger problem here is finding a universal way to determine what could be considered a "beginner-friendly" cache, and ideally to have at least a couple within a feasible distance of a new player to pique curiosity and go for the hunt. Cache type/size can't really be used as a universal indicator.

[+giddeanx]

Oh I know of the "hatred" of micros. The rest of my comment you left out addressed that.

Again: Not all micros are bad, or beginner-unfriendly. Even though there's a better chance of friendly caches larger than micros. It's region- and opinion-dependent. Excluding micros has collateral effect: reduces greatly the number of urban caches (regardless of your opinion about those), and areas that may actually have good hiders of micro caches. Thus, it's presumptuous and unfair to "exclude all micros". It's a vague blanket bandaid that may benefit some areas and do exactly the opposite as intended in others. That was the point I was making above.

eg, new player boots the intro app in the downtown core, finds the nearest "beginner" cache 20km away, outside the city - not knowing that there are actually 10 available within a couple of blocks of where they're standing that are easy and quick finds. Regardless of your opinion of cache types, that's not very beginner friendly (unless you're trying to further the agenda that "good" geocaches are only outside the city in woods and somewhat large containers).

Today there are many regional geocaching styles (worldwide, even) to address in an 'intro' app that could ideally be booted up anywhere in the world - from urban cores to wilderness, from dense areas to sparse, from traditional-heavy regions to puzzle or challenge-heavy regions.

 

The bigger problem here is finding a universal way to determine what could be considered a "beginner-friendly" cache, and ideally to have at least a couple within a feasible distance of a new player to pique curiosity and go for the hunt. Cache type/size can't really be used as a universal indicator.

 

The "beginner caches" on geocaching.com are defined as:

Traditional type

Low difficulty

Recently found by others

No micro sized caches

No problems reported

 

Seems reasonable to me.

[Clan Riffster]

Thus, it's presumptuous and unfair to "exclude all micros".

If we are working toward the same goal, at some point one must make certain presumptions. Groundspeak has already crossed that line when they created the beginner caches. Groundspeak presumed that caches with a low D/T rating, which have been found recently, are probably easier to find. Excluding micros is naught but an extension of the logic Groundspeak has already acted upon. As for unfair, one need only read all the threads from beginners bemoaning their difficulties in finding micros. If all other considerations are equal, it is typically easier to find a Greyhound bus parked in a hedge, than ito find a nano bot in the same hedge. On another note, regarding your claims of unfairness, I can think of scads of caches I have located in mere moments, which had a D/T rating above that selected by Groundspeak for their beginner caches. The same is true for caches which have had numerous DNFs and/or had not been found in quite some time. Is it 'fair' that Groundspeak excludes moderately high D/T ratings and caches which have not been found recently?

 

Groundspeak presumed, rightly so, that certain cache types are easier to find for beginners.

 

This has nothing to do with hating a particular cache size.

 

Rather, it is about trying to ensure that new players don't get frustrated.

 

While it's true that there are micros out there which are beginner friendly, judging by the sheer volume of frustrated noob posts, easy peasy micros are not necessarily the norm.

 

 

The bigger problem here is finding a universal way to determine what could be considered a "beginner-friendly" cache, and ideally to have at least a couple within a feasible distance of a new player to pique curiosity and go for the hunt. Cache type/size can't really be used as a universal indicator.

Groundspeak has already come up with certain criteria they use to determine if caches are "beginner-friendly".

History shows us that cache type and size do, to a degree, affect how easy a cache is to find.

[+L0ne.R]

Thus, it's presumptuous and unfair to "exclude all micros".

If we are working toward the same goal, at some point one must make certain presumptions. Groundspeak has already crossed that line when they created the beginner caches. Groundspeak presumed that caches with a low D/T rating, which have been found recently, are probably easier to find. Excluding micros is naught but an extension of the logic Groundspeak has already acted upon. As for unfair, one need only read all the threads from beginners bemoaning their difficulties in finding micros. If all other considerations are equal, it is typically easier to find a Greyhound bus parked in a hedge, than ito find a nano bot in the same hedge. On another note, regarding your claims of unfairness, I can think of scads of caches I have located in mere moments, which had a D/T rating above that selected by Groundspeak for their beginner caches. The same is true for caches which have had numerous DNFs and/or had not been found in quite some time. Is it 'fair' that Groundspeak excludes moderately high D/T ratings and caches which have not been found recently?

 

Groundspeak presumed, rightly so, that certain cache types are easier to find for beginners.

 

This has nothing to do with hating a particular cache size.

 

Rather, it is about trying to ensure that new players don't get frustrated.

 

While it's true that there are micros out there which are beginner friendly, judging by the sheer volume of frustrated noob posts, easy peasy micros are not necessarily the norm.

 

 

The bigger problem here is finding a universal way to determine what could be considered a "beginner-friendly" cache, and ideally to have at least a couple within a feasible distance of a new player to pique curiosity and go for the hunt. Cache type/size can't really be used as a universal indicator.

Groundspeak has already come up with certain criteria they use to determine if caches are "beginner-friendly".

History shows us that cache type and size do, to a degree, affect how easy a cache is to find.

 

And a lot of newbies start this pastime as a thing to do with their family, which often includes small children. Children typically prefer swag-size caches. If you want to get a family hooked, make the kids happy.

[+NeverSummer]

So, the Intro app users want and need an app that gives them geocaches. Enough of them that they can whet their appetite for more of this game. That's the "highlighted beginner caches" they see within the app. Our counter to that part is to update the beginner caches to exclude micros.

First, why micros? Plenty of micros are beginner-friendly. The idea of excluding micros to me seems like a very opinion-based call from the segment that deplores micros.

That said, there's a better chance that there are 'nicer' caches that aren't micros. But it's entirely region- and opinion-dependent. I don't think "exclude micros" as a blanket rule is fair.

I'm not a micro hater. I just understand that "micro" might include a nano, and that isn't going to be an easy find for most new cachers. Even some bison tubes are tough to find. I've had plenty of experience with low-rated micros that should have been rated higher. I don't hate them for it, but I could see how a new cacher would become frustrated.

 

Also, D/T ratings are all up to the owner to rate. Not all ratings are the same, and regionality and other factors weigh heavily on how "accurate" ratings are across the broad board Groundspeak has created with the name "beginner cache".

 

By removing what is generally a tougher cache size to find, the new cachers are encouraged by the ability to find a small-to-large cache with a lower D/T rating.

 

Really, it all comes down to making the beginner caches findable for a new cacher. Low D/T, small or greater in size, found recently, no problems, etc make for the best carrot for the stick, as Riffster said. That's all. It's not an "anti-micro" rant in the least.

[+giddeanx]

Thus, it's presumptuous and unfair to "exclude all micros".

If we are working toward the same goal, at some point one must make certain presumptions. Groundspeak has already crossed that line when they created the beginner caches. Groundspeak presumed that caches with a low D/T rating, which have been found recently, are probably easier to find. Excluding micros is naught but an extension of the logic Groundspeak has already acted upon. As for unfair, one need only read all the threads from beginners bemoaning their difficulties in finding micros. If all other considerations are equal, it is typically easier to find a Greyhound bus parked in a hedge, than ito find a nano bot in the same hedge. On another note, regarding your claims of unfairness, I can think of scads of caches I have located in mere moments, which had a D/T rating above that selected by Groundspeak for their beginner caches. The same is true for caches which have had numerous DNFs and/or had not been found in quite some time. Is it 'fair' that Groundspeak excludes moderately high D/T ratings and caches which have not been found recently?

 

Groundspeak presumed, rightly so, that certain cache types are easier to find for beginners.

 

This has nothing to do with hating a particular cache size.

 

Rather, it is about trying to ensure that new players don't get frustrated.

 

While it's true that there are micros out there which are beginner friendly, judging by the sheer volume of frustrated noob posts, easy peasy micros are not necessarily the norm.

 

 

The bigger problem here is finding a universal way to determine what could be considered a "beginner-friendly" cache, and ideally to have at least a couple within a feasible distance of a new player to pique curiosity and go for the hunt. Cache type/size can't really be used as a universal indicator.

Groundspeak has already come up with certain criteria they use to determine if caches are "beginner-friendly".

History shows us that cache type and size do, to a degree, affect how easy a cache is to find.

 

And a lot of newbies start this pastime as a thing to do with their family, which often includes small children. Children typically prefer swag-size caches. If you want to get a family hooked, make the kids happy.

One of the first caches I went for with my kids was designated a beginner's cache. As soon as they saw the swag they were hooked. Immediately, I could give my wife a break by Geocaching with the kids. So in this case it worked.

 

As far as the hate of micros goes, 2 of my 3 children don't like micros, because there is no "stuff" inside. The other just enjoys the hunt. I wonder if I can get a government grant for my study.

[+tozainamboku]

I've no problem with the Intro app recommending "beginner" caches, but it really needs to allow geocachers to choose whatever cache they want to look for. You will definitely have new users who are only interested in easy to get to urban hides which are overwhelmingly micros. Some may even prefer looking for something challenging (even a needle-in-a-haystack will appeal to some set of newbies). Other newbies may prefer to look for only larger size caches, or they may prefer avoiding urban areas and taking hikes (or wading in alligator infested swamps). I've little doubt that some will become interested in geocaching because of puzzle caches that provide a mental challenge separate from the physical activity of going to the cache site and searching for the container.

 

I certainly understand that there are many caches that get rated 1 star difficulty in urban enviroments which are in fact much more difficult for newbie who has never seen a nano or doesn't know you can slide the skirt up a lamppost. The idead of beginner caches is to suggest something that is more likely to be found by a beginner than might be suggested by difficulty alone. However, if a newbie wants to look for something more challenging, that should be their choice.

[+niraD]

First, why micros? Plenty of micros are beginner-friendly.

Sure, but how do you identify the micros that are beginner-friendly in an automated way?

 

As I wrote in an earlier reply to this thread, I'd hesitate to include even D1 or D1.5 micros in the list of beginner caches. A lot of the micros that are rated that low are rated that way because they're in "the usual place", and experienced geocachers know to look there. But beginners don't know where "the usual places" are. To a novice geocacher who doesn't know to check for the LPC or GRC or UPS or FPC or MKH or any other TLA that makes it a QEF for experienced geocachers, micros like that can be anything but an easy beginner cache.

 

The idea of excluding micros to me seems like a very opinion-based call from the segment that deplores micros.

Not at all. A lot of my Favorites have been micros. As a rule, I enjoy searching for a D4 micro more than searching for a D1 ammo can.

 

But as a rule of thumb, I don't think micros are good beginner caches. Sure, there are exceptions, but I don't see a way to identify them automatically for a new improved intro system.

[+NeverSummer]

I've no problem with the Intro app recommending "beginner" caches, but it really needs to allow geocachers to choose whatever cache they want to look for. You will definitely have new users who are only interested in easy to get to urban hides which are overwhelmingly micros. Some may even prefer looking for something challenging (even a needle-in-a-haystack will appeal to some set of newbies). Other newbies may prefer to look for only larger size caches, or they may prefer avoiding urban areas and taking hikes (or wading in alligator infested swamps). I've little doubt that some will become interested in geocaching because of puzzle caches that provide a mental challenge separate from the physical activity of going to the cache site and searching for the container.

 

I certainly understand that there are many caches that get rated 1 star difficulty in urban enviroments which are in fact much more difficult for newbie who has never seen a nano or doesn't know you can slide the skirt up a lamppost. The idead of beginner caches is to suggest something that is more likely to be found by a beginner than might be suggested by difficulty alone. However, if a newbie wants to look for something more challenging, that should be their choice.

This is where my recommendation of a three-tiered app progression would be perfect.

1) Free Intro App: limited access, whets the appetite, provides tips and references the guidelines and directs toward website, forums, knowledge books, and facebook page. Goes "pop" after a certain number of finds and encourages the user to upgrade their app, and/or their membersip.

2) 99 cent App: Limited access, but more functionality. Still has tips, references and guides, but also lets you see more caches outside of the "beginner" caches. Goes "pop" after a certain duration (say, 90 days) with a "nag" screen encouraging the user to upgrade their membership to premium and/or their app to full function.

3) $9.99 App: Full function. Should add in functionality for cache owners to view own caches and account info. Should add quicklinks to website, knowledge books, guidelines.

 

All app versions should require valid email verification processes.

[+thebruce0]

Ok wow. That comment prompted a whole lot of replies.

First, I completely forgot that gc.com already provides a way to highlight 'beginner caches' in search results.

However, note that the search results option highlights listings, it doesn't exclude all caches except beginner caches (which is what is being proposed for the intro app).

 

So...

The "beginner caches" on geocaching.com are defined as:

Traditional type

Low difficulty

Recently found by others

No micro sized caches

No problems reported

Seems reasonable to me.

Likewise - as a highlighting parameter set; as recommendations. But it feels that providing only those caches as visible in the intro app will deter some people in certain regions/environments from playing thinking that there aren't really any caches around. And if there's an option of opening up the search to show them all, that sort of defeats the purpose of the discussion in this thread (they can just turn off the beginner filter and get access to all the caches anyway without needing to 'upgrade')

 

As for my "unfair" comment - admittedly that's a loaded word to use couldn't decide on a better one. It conjurs images of someone upset that their cache can't be considered beginner friendly even though they really really really wanted it to be one. Not what I was going for... I just meant unfair in an objective sense (if it's possible) Compared to other possible exclusions, I think cutting out micros isn't the best blanket parameter (for exclusive lists, as opposed to highlights). In the context of the Intro App, where an exclusive list of nearby 'beginner-friendly' caches is displayed - there should be a feasible method for determining what is displayed.

 

Secondly, most of the replies to mine echo what I'd already said - sure, there are some micros that are good (ie, there's a better chance of finding non-micro beginner friendly caches).

And yes, limiting any property in a cache search will cut out a swath of caches that are indeed beginner-friendly. Generally, beginner-friendly caches do exist across the entirety of possible cache listings! I just think that restricting all micro caches can have a much more limiting effect than some of the other proposed ideas presented here (even though they'd be more work to implement).

 

And again, I agree and think the current parameters for highlighting beginner caches (even not including micros) is a good set of parameters.

 

But as a rule of thumb, I don't think micros are good beginner caches. Sure, there are exceptions, but I don't see a way to identify them automatically for a new improved intro system.

Well, there isn't a way to identify "quality" caches automatically either - which is why there's the favorite point system. Would a beginner-friendly point system do the trick for an exclusive list of nearby beginner-friendly caches for any new user of the intro app? *shrug*

 

Maybe the intro app could search for an exclusive list of caches based on the existing parameters (including no micros), but "tease" about how many other caches are nearby that they could see if they upgraded their app.

 

3rd party apps would obviously still have to implement their own methods of introducing users to the game - so there's still no guarantee that frustrating new player habits would be removed from the hobby...

 

I'm all for improving the intro app, but whatever standard there is for determining 'beginner caches' should be made available as data for 3rd party apps as well. It's not (shouldn't be) just an app UI thing.

[+cerberus1]

At the very least require ALL users to register with, and validate, an email address in order to, at the very least, log, if not even seek, geocaches. How the heck are we supposed to reach out to new players and help bring them along if we can't even contact them through their profile?

Agreed.

- But today, this post may mean that maybe it isn't the users error/fault at all, but a "glitch" in the system.

Did this "glitch" ever come up yet in this thread? I don't remember seeing it...

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

At the very least require ALL users to register with, and validate, an email address in order to, at the very least, log, if not even seek, geocaches. How the heck are we supposed to reach out to new players and help bring them along if we can't even contact them through their profile?

Agreed.

- But today, this post may mean that maybe it isn't the users error/fault at all, but a "glitch" in the system.

Did this "glitch" ever come up yet in this thread? I don't remember seeing it...

Nope, I searched "glitch" in the thread and your post is the only one.

[+tango501]

Hosting a few events inviting newbies/smartphone only users might help as well.

Education is always paramount for the enjoyment of the masses. Pass on your experience

and knowledge

 

but then again I am only a noob, so there is my 2 cents worth

[+Glenn]

Hosting a few events inviting newbies/smartphone only users might help as well.

Education is always paramount for the enjoyment of the masses. Pass on your experience

and knowledge

 

but then again I am only a noob, so there is my 2 cents worth

 

How do you invite someone who doesn't provide an email address or phone number or any other way of contacting them? Do event caches even show up on the intro app? The intro app only shows the three closest caches to their current location. How will intro app users find events that are meant for them but are miles away from their location?

 

Maybe a friend feature can be added to the intro app that allows those of us who use the website to send messages directly to the intro app users. Then they will get a pop up the next time they use the app saying that they got a new message from a geocaching friend and give them the option to read and respond to the message. A lot of other iOS game apps have features like this that allow game app users to interact with other thru the game app.

[+baack40]

Starting to hate this intro app. I have gone out and checked on quite a few caches lately only to find that they are really there. Tried contacting a few people to see where they looked to see if I needed to check on them but no email address awailable. I guess I will just overlook DNF's for a while and not rush out to check on caches unless it is a more experienced cacher. These were guardrail caches that are not a magnetic key holder but something a little different. Easy cache rinds but probably not what they were expecting to find Has caused me a few trips out and for no reason. Wish I could have just contacted these people and asked a few questions before I made the trips. Grrrr

[+cerberus1]

Starting to hate this intro app. I have gone out and checked on quite a few caches lately only to find that they are really there. Tried contacting a few people to see where they looked to see if I needed to check on them but no email address awailable. I guess I will just overlook DNF's for a while and not rush out to check on caches unless it is a more experienced cacher. These were guardrail caches that are not a magnetic key holder but something a little different. Easy cache rinds but probably not what they were expecting to find Has caused me a few trips out and for no reason. Wish I could have just contacted these people and asked a few questions before I made the trips. Grrrr

I'd agree and I hear ya, but more than one in these forums has said that after a number of DNFs, their hides are temp disabled by a Reviewer until checked anyway.

So those folks aren't penalized by a person they can't contact, deleting their DNF might have to be an option.

[+Don_J]

I know that it's been discussed that the Into app only shows the new user caches that have a low difficulty. I can't remember if the exact threshold has been disclosed. With over 300 posts here it's kind of hard to browse for the answer. Does someone recall what that threshold is?

 

My friend has what is his typical hide in "plain site cache", that he rated 1.5D for the simple fact that everyone around here knows what to look for. A two day, invalidated member with two finds just posted a DNF indicating that it is missing. I would like to advise advise my friend to raise the difficulty above the threshold to avoid this.

[+Isonzo Karst]

I would like to advise advise my friend to raise the difficulty above the threshold to avoid this.

 

Or leave the D/T accurate, and make the cache PMO. This assuming your friend is a premium member and able to make that change. (I have caches at D2 that are in the intro app, so he'd have to go to at least 2.5, maybe to 3?)

 

I've reluctantly done that to a couple of my own caches, to keep them out of the intro app.

 

Challenge cache and an ammo can along the trail in a state park. Last year during the high caching season here, I made THREE trips to CLOSE the can. Found, moved somewhat, left open, then the next phone app cacher complains about wet....and leaves it as found - opened, wet.

 

The last trip, I had been there within 2 weeks, arrived to find can opened, AND drink containers dropped on site. Uses who aren't hikers, barely even walkers, afraid of snakes and spider webs, clueless about poison ivy (I can't protect them from this) who can carry vitamin water, colas, energy drinks from their car, but need to drop those containers when they stop.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Isonzo Karst

[+Team Microdot]

...I made THREE trips to CLOSE the can. Found, moved somewhat, left open, then the next phone app cacher complains about wet....and leaves it as found - opened, wet.

 

Sadly, making things idiot-proof is quite difficult and frequently one has to make do with idiot-resistant

[+cerberus1]

I know that it's been discussed that the Into app only shows the new user caches that have a low difficulty. I can't remember if the exact threshold has been disclosed. With over 300 posts here it's kind of hard to browse for the answer. Does someone recall what that threshold is?

 

My friend has what is his typical hide in "plain site cache", that he rated 1.5D for the simple fact that everyone around here knows what to look for. A two day, invalidated member with two finds just posted a DNF indicating that it is missing. I would like to advise advise my friend to raise the difficulty above the threshold to avoid this.

Last mentioned :

Suggested caches include this filtering:

•Traditionals only

 

•5 mile radius of user's location

 

•No premium member caches (unless the user is premium)

 

•Terrain 1-3

 

•Difficulty 1-2

 

•Small, Regular, Large, and Micro (only D1-1.5)

 

•Caches without NM or NA logs

 

•Caches found in the last 300 days

 

Once the caches have been flagged as good for a newbie, they are then sorted by:

•Last found date

 

•Size (large>small>micro)

 

•Favorite points (highest to lowest

 

- The intro app was just updated a day or two ago (look at release notes), so not sure it's identical this time.

[+Semper Questio]

...I made THREE trips to CLOSE the can. Found, moved somewhat, left open, then the next phone app cacher complains about wet....and leaves it as found - opened, wet.

 

Sadly, making things idiot-proof is quite difficult and frequently one has to make do with idiot-resistant

 

Not only that, but if you do manage to make something idiot-proof, a better quality idiot will be along soon.

[+Glenn]

...I made THREE trips to CLOSE the can. Found, moved somewhat, left open, then the next phone app cacher complains about wet....and leaves it as found - opened, wet.

 

Sadly, making things idiot-proof is quite difficult and frequently one has to make do with idiot-resistant

 

Not only that, but if you do manage to make something idiot-proof, a better quality idiot will be along soon.

 

True, but an "idiot" with a valid email address, or other contact info, at least can be contacted and edification attempted.

 

However, I don't think it is that they are idiots. I think that it is that they are lazy. Before smart phones and the intro app you had to learn how to use a GPS or a GPS app. That isn't very hard to do but at least it was something. The intro app is so easy to use that any unsupervised 6 year old with a smart phone can be finding caches in seconds. Leaving trash in the cache container instead of taking it with you and repeatedly leaving the cache container open are not signs of being an idiot. They are signs of immaturity and laziness.

 

Don't get me wrong. I think that it great that the intro app is introducing more people to the hobby but I isn't all about the numbers. If maintaining caches that are showing up on the intro app start to become a chore or a job instead of fun part of the hobby then those geocachers will pack up their caches and go home or play somewhere else. That's a lose-lose situation all around.

[+Semper Questio]

...I made THREE trips to CLOSE the can. Found, moved somewhat, left open, then the next phone app cacher complains about wet....and leaves it as found - opened, wet.

 

Sadly, making things idiot-proof is quite difficult and frequently one has to make do with idiot-resistant

 

Not only that, but if you do manage to make something idiot-proof, a better quality idiot will be along soon.

 

True, but an "idiot" with a valid email address, or other contact info, at least can be contacted and edification attempted.

 

However, I don't think it is that they are idiots. I think that it is that they are lazy. Before smart phones and the intro app you had to learn how to use a GPS or a GPS app. That isn't very hard to do but at least it was something. The intro app is so easy to use that any unsupervised 6 year old with a smart phone can be finding caches in seconds. Leaving trash in the cache container instead of taking it with you and repeatedly leaving the cache container open are not signs of being an idiot. They are signs of immaturity and laziness.

 

Don't get me wrong. I think that it great that the intro app is introducing more people to the hobby but I isn't all about the numbers. If maintaining caches that are showing up on the intro app start to become a chore or a job instead of fun part of the hobby then those geocachers will pack up their caches and go home or play somewhere else. That's a lose-lose situation all around.

 

And you are largely correct. But there is also a major shift in the works on not only HOW people are coming into this game, but WHO is coming into this game and it has nothing to do with idiots. It has to do with expectations and availability. The apps make the game FAR more available and many (if not most) of th efolks using them have expectations that everything they need to know or care about is covered by the app. The problem is that there is nothing in the app to show, or even indicate, that they are wrong.

[+The Rat]

I don't own a smart phone and have never heard of this INTRO app, but I agree that smart phones have greatly hurt the sport. However, there were vandals before that who would find and remove caches or steal the contents. I solved the problem for my own caches long before smart phones by making them (almost all) puzzles, mostly rather hard puzzles. This limits the number of people who can/will find them, but around here that number is a pretty big number and they are all geocachers who know and respect the rules. I have made some PMO, too, but that tends to limit potential finders even more so I generally don't do that any more.

[+thebruce0]

There are bad players with GPSs.

There are bad players with smartphones.

Smartphones have been a double edged sword - it has brought in a whole lot of new players, and a vast majority of these are 'good' players, but it has also opened the door for more 'bad' players; these are the exception to the rule.

The problem is not smartphones, the problem is simply that there is a much larger swath of the population now able to quickly pick up the game. I would guess the ratio of idiots to not-idiots hasn't changed. But the quantity of both has increased proportionately.

Edited December 5, 2013 by thebruce0

[+6NoisyHikers]

There are idiots and not-idiots, but there are also "n00bs". We all start out as n00bs, making the silly mistakes that n00bs make because we rushed out and didn't read the rules first. Over time, we learn and make up for those mistakes.

 

With the advent of the app, there is an increase in "one-weekend wonders". They make the n00b mistakes of taking trackables or posting spoiler logs (or TFTC logs) or walking off with a container and they won't ever make amends - not because they are malicious but because they simply have no personal investment in the game to encourage them to dig deeper. It's not a community, it's not even a game. It's just an app.

 

Which is why I'd like to see the intro app limited to 5 caches - to keep the potential damage caused by one-weekend wonders to a minimum.

[+Manville Possum]

As the OP has suggested, PMO listings are working for me. It's not even funny how I once was against PMO hides and Waymarking. I remember when I enjoyed EarthCaches too.

[Mr.Yuck]

There are bad players with GPSs.

There are bad players with smartphones.

Smartphones have been a double edged sword - it has brought in a whole lot of new players, and a vast majority of these are 'good' players, but it has also opened the door for more 'bad' players; these are the exception to the rule.

The problem is not smartphones, the problem is simply that there is a much larger swath of the population now able to quickly pick up the game. I would guess the ratio of idiots to not-idiots hasn't changed. But the quantity of both has increased proportionately.

 

I don't really think it's discussed around here how many new players. Although I believe Iphone and Droid apps came out in 2009, early 2010 is a good reference point, because that's when the 3,000,000th account was created. Keep in mind that's 9 years to reach 3,000,000 accounts. How many are there today? About 8,500,000. They will easily reach 9,000,000 by February, meaning the will triple the number of accounts in 4 years. Go ahead and go out on a limb and guess how many are/were smartphone players.

 

I don't know where you can say the vast majority of them are 'good' players. If anything, the vast majority of them dropped 10 or 20 Tftc logs on us, lost interest, and will never be heard from again.

[+thebruce0]

I don't know where you can say the vast majority of them are 'good' players. If anything, the vast majority of them dropped 10 or 20 Tftc logs on us, lost interest, and will never be heard from again.

 

I didn't say they were evenly spread across the globe

[Mr.Yuck]

I don't know where you can say the vast majority of them are 'good' players. If anything, the vast majority of them dropped 10 or 20 Tftc logs on us, lost interest, and will never be heard from again.

 

I didn't say they were evenly spread across the globe

 

I know you're the staunchest of the staunchest defenders of Smartphone caching. You know what I seriously see amongst those who stick with it and become highly active Geocachers, with find counts into the hundreds or thousands? And not just my area, I get around a little, to Ontario, and the Midwestern U.S. I see that the "vast majority" (there's that term again), eventually get a clue, and move away from lame logging, i.e. dropping Tftc logs on every cache. I also see The vast majority of 500+ find Smartphone cachers not hiding very many caches. Often 1 or 2, often none at all. There are exceptions to both of course, the 2,000 find guy who has never met any caching friends or attended any events who's still dropping Tftc on people, or the person who has hidden 75 caches with their Iphone. But I am talking vast majority here. In my opinion and observations, of course.

Edited December 7, 2013 by Mr.Yuck

[+6NoisyHikers]

I don't really think it's discussed around here how many new players. Although I believe Iphone and Droid apps came out in 2009, early 2010 is a good reference point, because that's when the 3,000,000th account was created. Keep in mind that's 9 years to reach 3,000,000 accounts. How many are there today? About 8,500,000. They will easily reach 9,000,000 by February, meaning the will triple the number of accounts in 4 years. Go ahead and go out on a limb and guess how many are/were smartphone players.

 

I don't know where you can say the vast majority of them are 'good' players. If anything, the vast majority of them dropped 10 or 20 Tftc logs on us, lost interest, and will never be heard from again.

 

Actually, a lot of those 8 million accounts are accidents and abandonments. Go to the "Find Another Player" page, type in any word (moose, car, eggplant), and see how many of those accounts are still active - if they have any finds at all or were ever even accessed after their creation. About one in ten.

 

So, out of the (let's be generous) one million actual users world-wide, I agree that the bulk of them are fly-by-night "appies". CacherStats lists only 258,000 cachers with over 200 finds. It's a good bet that at least 500,000 of the leftover amount is made up of appies.

 

[Play broken record:] Please put a 5 cache limit on the intro app.

[+Isonzo Karst]

....It's not a community, it's not even a game. It's just an app.

 

Outstanding

 

I'd go here wit the Intro app: 5 cache limit, nothing with Trackables in it, must verify email address, including demonstrating that they can receive email from noreply@geocaching.com .

[Mr.Yuck]

I don't really think it's discussed around here how many new players. Although I believe Iphone and Droid apps came out in 2009, early 2010 is a good reference point, because that's when the 3,000,000th account was created. Keep in mind that's 9 years to reach 3,000,000 accounts. How many are there today? About 8,500,000. They will easily reach 9,000,000 by February, meaning the will triple the number of accounts in 4 years. Go ahead and go out on a limb and guess how many are/were smartphone players.

 

I don't know where you can say the vast majority of them are 'good' players. If anything, the vast majority of them dropped 10 or 20 Tftc logs on us, lost interest, and will never be heard from again.

 

Actually, a lot of those 8 million accounts are accidents and abandonments. Go to the "Find Another Player" page, type in any word (moose, car, eggplant), and see how many of those accounts are still active - if they have any finds at all or were ever even accessed after their creation. About one in ten.

 

So, out of the (let's be generous) one million actual users world-wide, I agree that the bulk of them are fly-by-night "appies". CacherStats lists only 258,000 cachers with over 200 finds. It's a good bet that at least 500,000 of the leftover amount is made up of appies.

 

[Play broken record:] Please put a 5 cache limit on the intro app.

 

We're getting off topic here, but no one knows of what you speak more than me. Neither I, nor anyone I know, has looked at this in a few years, but the last time I remember someone doing so (pre 2009 Smartphone era) it was found that about 50% of accounts had never found or hidden a cache, and a large percentage of them were one day log-ins. In other words people were just creating an account on some website they stumbled on, because it was free. P.S. They will not delete spammer accounts here, I'll betcha there's 1/2 a mill there.

 

I had just assumed The 50% number was much lower in this era, and that a high percentage of smartphone players were actually going and finding caches then the "sit down at your computer and create an account you're never going to use" era.

 

Verifying their email address is the most important thing needed on the intro app. Had to sneak that in.

[+JesandTodd]

There are idiots and not-idiots, but there are also "n00bs". We all start out as n00bs, making the silly mistakes that n00bs make because we rushed out and didn't read the rules first. Over time, we learn and make up for those mistakes.

 

With the advent of the app, there is an increase in "one-weekend wonders". They make the n00b mistakes of taking trackables or posting spoiler logs (or TFTC logs) or walking off with a container and they won't ever make amends - not because they are malicious but because they simply have no personal investment in the game to encourage them to dig deeper. It's not a community, it's not even a game. It's just an app.

 

Which is why I'd like to see the intro app limited to 5 caches - to keep the potential damage caused by one-weekend wonders to a minimum.

 

Finally. This is the best explanation so far, and I have to agree.

 

All smartphone users aren't lazy and idiotic. But newbies are newbies. The need to feel like they are part of a community, not just an app

 

I don't know where you can say the vast majority of them are 'good' players. If anything, the vast majority of them dropped 10 or 20 Tftc logs on us, lost interest, and will never be heard from again.

 

I didn't say they were evenly spread across the globe

 

I know you're the staunchest of the staunchest defenders of Smartphone caching.

 

The staunchest of the staunchest??

[Mr.Yuck]

 

I don't know where you can say the vast majority of them are 'good' players. If anything, the vast majority of them dropped 10 or 20 Tftc logs on us, lost interest, and will never be heard from again.

 

I didn't say they were evenly spread across the globe

 

I know you're the staunchest of the staunchest defenders of Smartphone caching.

 

The staunchest of the staunchest??

 

Well you're pretty staunch, from what I remember. But the badge has to go to that guy that won a one year premium membership from Roman. That guy was staunch.

[^up]

I'm tempter to go make all 900 of my hides into PREMIUM to keep INTRO people from finding the...

You should be banned from the hobby!

[+thebruce0]

Finally. This is the best explanation so far, and I have to agree.

 

All smartphone users aren't lazy and idiotic. But newbies are newbies. The need to feel like they are part of a community, not just an app

Yep.

 

The INTRO app is an enabler - smartphone users aren't the problem - the intro app allowing potentially lazy users to be lazy is the problem. There are lazy non-smartphone users, but it's just harder for them to be lazy because they have to do all that work to actually log a find online

 

[ didn't say they were evenly spread across the globe

I know you're the staunchest of the staunchest defenders of Smartphone caching.

The staunchest of the staunchest??

Shall we compete? heh Nah, you'd probably win in a heartbeat. I'm too lazy. Thankfully I don't use the INTRO app.

[+Manville Possum]

The INTRO app is an enabler - smartphone users aren't the problem...

 

I agree. My friend with over 10K finds just logged one of my PMO listings from their Iphone. They stated in their log that the smart phone did not help much other than to use it to contact another member that has already found the cache. I'll stick with my paperless GPS units, but many of the new local geocachers that are hosting events and placing PMO hides are using smartphones. PMO is the answer for me with this geocache listing service. There are other sites out there that you can play on for free that have similar features as the PQ's here. I'm sold on supporting Groundspeak with my membership fees and PMO hides.

Edited December 7, 2013 by Manville Possum Hunters

[+Team Microdot]

There are idiots and not-idiots, but there are also "n00bs". We all start out as n00bs, with some of us making the silly mistakes that n00bs make because we rushed out and didn't read the rules first. Over time, some of us learn and make up for those mistakes.

 

Additions in bold are mine.

 

We didn't read all the rules before rushing out - but we did read the basics - because we had to in order to gain a basic understanding of what to do. Do intro app users need to do even this small amount of study?

 

With the advent of the app, there is an increase in "one-weekend wonders". They make the n00b mistakes of taking trackables or posting spoiler logs (or TFTC logs) or walking off with a container and they won't ever make amends - not because they are malicious but because they simply have no personal investment in the game to encourage them to dig deeper. It's not a community, it's not even a game. It's just an app.

 

Which is why I'd like to see the intro app limited to 5 caches - to keep the potential damage caused by one-weekend wonders to a minimum.

 

Completely agree with all of this

 

All smartphone users aren't lazy and idiotic.

 

Don't think anybody suggested they were

 

But newbies are newbies. The need to feel like they are part of a community, not just an app

 

Yes they are - and no, they don't. They don't need to feel part of anything in order to install a free app and get out there among the caches we all work hard to place. The only thing they need is the free app that doesn't even require them to provide a valid email address :SIGH:

[+Manville Possum]

They don't need to feel part of anything in order to install a free app and get out there among the caches we all work hard to place. The only thing they need is the free app that doesn't even require them to provide a valid email address :SIGH:

 

That's understandable. Many new members give geocaching a try and give up, it's not for everyone. The app is like a test drive the way I see it. PMO listings are for the more avid geocachers and the ones like myself that place and maintain geocache listings and do want to be part of the geocaching community. As far as a valid email address? I like the option to only have friends and moderators contact me, but that is not an option here. I assume that if a user does not have a validated email address that they can not contact other members? Correct?

[+cerberus1]

PMO listings are for the more avid geocachers and the ones like myself that place and maintain geocache listings and do want to be part of the geocaching community.

I consider myself to be an avid geocacher and not only want to be, but am part of and involved in a few geocaching communities. I place and maintain hides and none are pmo.

What does pmo have to do with being an avid cacher or being "part of the community"?

The community is all of us, not just "the ones like yourself".

- That's insulting to every basic member on this site, who I bet outnumber us.

 

If you really wanted to be part of the geocaching community, you'd realize that without new folks (most who can't access your pmo hides) and their membership cash, monies needed for improvements could eventually come out of our pockets alone.

If we wanted improvements...

Their new (sometimes too different for some) ideas keep us from getting stale.

Having a club with only members you know isn't a community.

[+TheWeatherWarrior]

Getting a little off topic, but iPhone GPS tends to be MORE accurate than GPS units. In addition to the GPS, they use cellular tower triangulation. In most every situation I've checked against an official Benchmark, the phone won over the GPS (mostly Garmins, but a couple Delorme).

 

Back to the newbies, I actually find the noobs to be better than many of the cachers with 1000s of finds in short periods of time. Chronically logging short logs, log weeks and months late sometimes not correcting the ACTUAL find day, they don't respond to messages, they don't sign the physical logs. They often don't return the cache the way it was when found. So don't blame newbies when so-called advance members often are worse! The App has ZERO to do with it.

Edited December 8, 2013 by TheWeatherWarrior

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Getting a little off topic, but iPhone GPS tends to be MORE accurate than GPS units. In addition to the GPS, they use cellular tower triangulation. In most every situation I've checked against an official Benchmark, the phone won over the GPS (mostly Garmins, but a couple Delorme).

 

Back to the newbies, I actually find the noobs to be better than many of the cachers with 1000s of finds in short periods of time. Chronically logging short logs, log weeks and months late sometimes not correcting the ACTUAL find day, they don't respond to messages, they don't sign the physical logs. They often don't return the cache the way it was when found. So don't blame newbies when so-called advance members often are worse! The App has ZERO to do with it.

Odd... I find almost all of the above to be the exact opposite. Aside from the phone vs. dedicated GPSr unit argument.

Just who is most likely to actually read about geocaching and the guidelines? Certainly not the person that "discovers" an app. More likely it'll be the person that discovers geocaching itself and reads up on it BEFORE laying out the money to purchase a (good) GPSr.

 

True, there are long-time cachers that get lackadaisical in their approach to geocaching, but then... just look at the driving population -- I mean, there is a quite a parallel there. Beginners are "bad" because they don't know better, old-timers can go bad because they simply, well... forgot!

 

Personally, I think the Intro App, actually creates more harm than good, as far as geocachers go... as far as Groundspeak goes it does more good... more geocachers = more money for them. Probably the same approach I might take if'n it were my business.

Edited December 8, 2013 by Gitchee-Gummee

[Clan Riffster]

Getting a little off topic, but iPhone GPS tends to be MORE accurate than GPS units. In addition to the GPS, they use cellular tower triangulation. In most every situation I've checked against an official Benchmark, the phone won over the GPS (mostly Garmins, but a couple Delorme).

 

Back to the newbies, I actually find the noobs to be better than many of the cachers with 1000s of finds in short periods of time. Chronically logging short logs, log weeks and months late sometimes not correcting the ACTUAL find day, they don't respond to messages, they don't sign the physical logs. They often don't return the cache the way it was when found. So don't blame newbies when so-called advance members often are worse! The App has ZERO to do with it.

Odd... I find almost all of the above to be the exact opposite.

Aside from the phone vs. dedicated GPSr unit argument.

I found the opposite to be true as well, including the phone Vs handheld thing.