Jump to content

Optional Paper Log Free Micro Caches


MazterGee
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

Just an idea, especially for those of you Cachers who forget a pen, or find a lot of soggy logs, and for those owners who keep having to replace logs frequently way before they become full due to the constant wet weather here in England.

 

The benefits of having a laminated piece of paper with a 4 digit code in a small, nano or micro cache is as follows:

 

1. Will stop constant wet logs and the CO having to visit frequently to replace.

2. Cachers who use smartphones who can log their find online using the code (obviously a change in the app)

3. Cacher's who forget pens

4. Will stop cacher's logging false finds, especially those who tend to log a find just because they find the cache location but the cache is missing.

 

Without this 4 digit code a Find cannot be logged. So basically , when you click to to Log a Find, Found It a pop up window will appear asking for the 4 digit code (which was added to the listing when the cache listing was setup). All other logs will stay the same. This can obviously be an option within the listing when it is being setup.

 

Obviously this will mean changes to the website. But I'm sure it would only be small.

 

Just a thought. I know many cachers who would back this idea.

Edited by Maztergee
Link to comment

1. Will stop constant wet logs and the CO having to visit frequently to replace.

 

If the log is constantly wet the CO should have selected a better container. If it gets filled up too often because it's so tiny the CO should consider the value of Smalls and Regulars. I wouldn't be in favor of any change that encourages more micros and relieves CO's of ALL maintenance responsibilities.

 

2. Cachers who use smartphones who can log their find online using the code (obviously a change in the app)

 

They can do that now.

 

3. Cacher's who forget pens

 

That's their problem

 

4. Will stop cacher's logging false finds, especially those who tend to log a find just because they find the cache location but the cache is missing.

 

I think it would INCREASE false finds. Those code numbers would get shared around the Internet just like trackable numbers and puzzle solutions do now. Checking a signature on the log is the ONLY way we currently have for a CO to confirm positively that the person claiming the find was actually there.

 

I'm sure the idea has been brought up before. It never gets any traction.

Link to comment

If you place a nano or micro, you should be aware of the more frequent maintenance needs before placing it, and accept that responsibility.

 

I also agree that the codes would get shared, and more cheating would result. It's bad enough with TB's now; I can imagine thousands of cache codes being disseminated and logged. *shudder*

 

It's good to be thinking, though! Unfortunately, this idea would have too many negative consequences, IMHO.

Link to comment

Keyword caches are not a new idea. But geocaching.com stopped listing them many years ago. Others have already explained that they won't really solve any problems (except for the forgotten pen, but even without a pen you'll still need some way to record the keyword).

Link to comment

I can see the next event now with sheets of the codes being passed around and of course the website you could use to get them

Why jot down the code, or even go to the bother of finding the cache? Just log in to a Web site, get the code, and get your smiley.

 

For the entrepreneur types among us, the domain name cachecodes.com is still available. :ph34r:

 

--Larry

Link to comment

Thinking outside the box a little that would solve the "code ending up on the internet" problem and also the "they're getting so small it's bloody stupid" problem.

 

Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.

Link to comment
Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.
So how is this an improvement over the low-tech solution of a physical log and a pen/pencil? What is the problem that this electronic "one time pad" is trying to solve?
Link to comment
Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.
So how is this an improvement over the low-tech solution of a physical log and a pen/pencil? What is the problem that this electronic "one time pad" is trying to solve?

 

Never said it was an improvement on pen and paper however the issue that has been raised with the OP's code idea is that codes could just be collected on the net and used to make false logs. If this sort of device is used you do away with collecting codes Because the code it's different each time it's used.

Edited by Tassie_Boy
Link to comment
Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.
So how is this an improvement over the low-tech solution of a physical log and a pen/pencil? What is the problem that this electronic "one time pad" is trying to solve?

It's to solve the "problem" that we must eliminate low-tech wherever we find it. :rolleyes:

Edited by wmpastor
Link to comment
Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.
So how is this an improvement over the low-tech solution of a physical log and a pen/pencil? What is the problem that this electronic "one time pad" is trying to solve?

It's to solve the "problem" that we must eliminate low-tech wherever we find it. :rolleyes:

 

As I say just an idea for the issues raised against the op's suggestion, I'm personally Fine with pen and paper but do find it amazing that for a hobby that relies on satellites telling computers where on earth we are that every time a topic like this comes up the overwhelming result is a loud cry of "keep it low tech"

Link to comment

You know, as a CO, if you really want to implement something like this, you can. Just put in your container a little slip with a code and note on it saying that - "if you don't have a pen, don't worry! Just contact me with this code after you post your find, and I'll allow you to log this cache found!".

 

No need to force a system-wide modification to automate the process.

 

As a CO you're given the power to delete (or leave) find logs where a signature is not in the physical logbook (primarily to clean up false finds online). So, offer this option on your caches for cachers in those cases where legitimate finds are made, even though a signature isn't in the logbook.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

Just an idea, especially for those of you Cachers who forget a pen, or find a lot of soggy logs, and for those owners who keep having to replace logs frequently way before they become full due to the constant wet weather here in England.

 

The benefits of having a laminated piece of paper with a 4 digit code in a small, nano or micro cache is as follows:

 

1. Will stop constant wet logs and the CO having to visit frequently to replace.

2. Cachers who use smartphones who can log their find online using the code (obviously a change in the app)

3. Cacher's who forget pens

4. Will stop cacher's logging false finds, especially those who tend to log a find just because they find the cache location but the cache is missing.

 

Without this 4 digit code a Find cannot be logged. So basically , when you click to to Log a Find, Found It a pop up window will appear asking for the 4 digit code (which was added to the listing when the cache listing was setup). All other logs will stay the same. This can obviously be an option within the listing when it is being setup.

 

Obviously this will mean changes to the website. But I'm sure it would only be small.

 

Just a thought. I know many cachers who would back this idea.

 

Wonderful idea!!! With one exception. Having read through the previous posts, I see a lot of concern over "shared codes" and "false finds". Reading the original post (even before finishing the entire thread) the first thought I had is:

 

The wind blows 24/7/365 where I am. That "small laminated piece of paper"??? Gone with the wind. Then what?? Or stolen by some disgruntled cacher?? If the logsheet is missing, wet, moldy, or full in a cache I found today, I can replace it, sign it, and still claim the smiley. (whether or not all are inclined to do so) No code??? No log.

 

The SAME owner who is reluctant to go out and perform cache maintenance on the current type of cache is somehow going to rush out and quickly replace a lost code??

 

Don't think so.dry.gif

 

As for the "keep it low tech" argument... maintenance on the high tech aspect of this hobby is performed by the Govt. on their end, GS on the web, and the GPS owner on our end. Most of us (all?) don't leave our high tech equipment out in the weather totally exposed to the elements. Short of the sat exposure that is. And they are not subject to the same variables as some high tech "gadget" left out in the middle of nowhere. I can see risking the loss of a lock-n-lock, or an ammo can, or even a pill bottle, but most of us are not going to leave a higher priced "gadget" out in the elements, exposed to strangers who have been given it's location. So I think on the cache end... low tech is probably all anyone is willing to risk at this point.

 

Not to mention the apparent flop of a certain company's "Chirp" device.

Link to comment

You know, as a CO, if you really want to implement something like this, you can. Just put in your container a little slip with a code and note on it saying that - "if you don't have a pen, don't worry! Just contact me with this code after you post your find, and I'll allow you to log this cache found!".

 

No need to force a system-wide modification to automate the process.

 

As a CO you're given the power to delete (or leave) find logs where a signature is not in the physical logbook (primarily to clean up false finds online). So, offer this option on your caches for cachers in those cases where legitimate finds are made, even though a signature isn't in the logbook.

 

I really like this idea!! Subject to the same potential for loss of the physical slip itself, but it would over-ride the wet, full, no pen, log missing excuses.

 

I'm sure someone will squeal it could be considered an ALR though.dry.gif

 

Would surely shorten the Found it- Didn't find it thread!!:lol:

 

 

Link to comment

Wonderful idea!!! With one exception. Having read through the previous posts, I see a lot of concern over "shared codes" and "false finds". Reading the original post (even before finishing the entire thread) the first thought I had is:

 

The wind blows 24/7/365 where I am. That "small laminated piece of paper"??? Gone with the wind. Then what?? Or stolen by some disgruntled cacher?? If the logsheet is missing, wet, moldy, or full in a cache I found today, I can replace it, sign it, and still claim the smiley. (whether or not all are inclined to do so) No code??? No log.

All of these issues are the things the CO would have to decide if they want to deal with. All the addition of the code would be to the CO's own caches would be a way to reduce the work needed (if they so desired) on checking for valid logs.

If the code goes missing from the cache, well, the CO would have to decide how to handle the disputes. Ultimately, they can just say nope sorry, no find if you didn't sign, even if the code is not there. The code should not be something cachers can use instead of signing the logsheet (or it will raise a lot of drama for the CO). But it clearly has potential to raise some maintenance concerns if the CO is wishing to accept them. It wouldn't be breaking any guidelines, it would just bring it with a small potential for minor quibbles the Reviewers wouldn't care to deal with :P They would still likely side with the CO anyway, since the rules say the CO decides what is and is not a valid Find on their own caches; the baseline being a physical signature in the logbook.

 

Personally, IF I were to do something like that, I'd either not mention the existence of the code on the cache page at all, or I'd include the disclaimer that if the code is not in the cache, then (while I'd go to replace it) no signature in the log = no find. But the latter is really walking the line, and I'd wager most reviewers wouldn't publish with that wording :P Because, (cont'd)...

 

I'm sure someone will squeal it could be considered an ALR though.dry.gif

Would surely shorten the Found it- Didn't find it thread!!:lol:

 

enh - an ALR is a requirement for every finder to complete in order to log. Describing it could be interpreted (loosely) by some as an ALR if in the description, even though it's not a requirement to log the cache as found. Technically, the requirement is your physical name in the logbook. But there are plenty of instances where a name isn't or can't be signed, but it was still a legitimate find. So all this does is give a way to allow more legitimate finds on the cache, if they so please.

It would be only between the finder and the owner, and any disputes would fall back to the physical signature requirement and CO final decision.

*shrug*

 

Didn't say it was ideal or perfect, but it addresses the suggestion made in the OP on a CO-specific/cache-by-cache basis, requiring no work on GS's part, breaking no guidelines, and effectively accomplishing what the OP was looking for (without the technology; aside from email) :)

 

ETA: OHOHOH! It would also serve to reduce disputes in the context of "I'm not sure I found the cache, but I logged it found anyway". If the CO were to put the code on the container itself, they could then be sure of whether the cacher found the cache or just garbage ;)

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

ETA: OHOHOH! It would also serve to reduce disputes in the context of "I'm not sure I found the cache, but I logged it found anyway". If the CO were to put the code on the container itself, they could then be sure of whether the cacher found the cache or just garbage ;)

 

Also a good way to weed out those that logged a find on a throwdown vs. the original container.

Link to comment
Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.
I've thought about this some more, and I'm still confused.

 

When I log a cache online, I don't enter a time. The timestamp comes from my field notes, or it comes from whatever the default time is when I enter a date in the "Post a New Log" form. Where does the unique code from this electronic "one time pad" come in? And why couldn't I just sit at home, entering these codes from the comfort of my living room?

Link to comment
Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.
I've thought about this some more, and I'm still confused.

 

When I log a cache online, I don't enter a time. The timestamp comes from my field notes, or it comes from whatever the default time is when I enter a date in the "Post a New Log" form. Where does the unique code from this electronic "one time pad" come in? And why couldn't I just sit at home, entering these codes from the comfort of my living room?

 

Obviously the log submission for would need to be changed to allow the time that you found the cache to be entered.

 

The code comes from the dongle when a button is pressed but the code is different based upon the time and date when the button is pressed. I'm not an electronics wiz but I believe it uses some sort of algorithm to work it out.

 

When a cache is submitted using one of these devices the serial number of that dongle would need to be entered so that Groundspeak's system knows which one is in the cache and how to handle it.

 

When logging the find, if the code entered does not match the one that should have been displayed at the particular time on the date that it is claimed the cache was found then the system rejects the log submission.

 

You cannot sit at Home entering codes as each code is only good for say five minutes before the required code to log the cache changes and at any given time the codes are different across different dongles. Think of it as a random number except that Groundspeak's system knows what that number is supposed to be at that time.

 

The major obstacle to this idea is the Groundspeak time system. It would need to allow users to set a local time in their preferences because I, like presumably most of the rest of the world, couldn't give a stuff what time it is in Seattle and doing the conversion from local to Seattle time is likely to introduce errors and invalidate the log attempt.

 

You know I just read the thread title properly and saw that the OP is talking about micros and he's right, an alternative to paper in micros would be useful. As paper is handled the fibres become looser and the sheet becomes fat and folds are no longer as sharp as they once were. This leads to one of the biggest complaints about micros, the log gets put in and can't be extracted again. This seems to be one of the biggest complaints people have with micro sized caches besides simply disliking them.

Another use for you. Wet caches. Small electronic devices like this are surprisingly easy to water proof when they never need to be opened. Some caches get wet because they are designed badly but some don't stand a chance from the start. I found one a few months ago like that. They had used a good sistema container but the environment it was in was its downfall. Even the best container needs to be opened the access the cache contents and as soon as you do the inside of the container becomes a part of the system outside the container and the system as a whole will find an equilibrium for the moisture content of the air. When the loud is closed again the air inside will still have that same moisture content until it is opened again. If it sits for long enough it is impossible to stop the paper log from getting soggy. Also by removing the major source of readily metabolized carbohydrates you'll probably find less mould in caches as well.

 

Third possible use: Remote area caches like in the south west of Tasmania or at a fuel dump along the Canning Stock Route. You place the cache and the maintenance place is to use report of maintenance needed as an excuse to head back out. Inside you place a log book and a dongle. This is probably the sort of cache you want to keep an eye on if you are worried about fake logs.

Report of full log comes in and you put a note on the cache page saying you're onto it. Except that by the time you find mates to go with you, all book holidays, organise gear and make the ten day walk/drive 3 months could easily pass. If in that time someone does pass and finds the cache but can't sign because the log is full they could get their online log deleted if you run a policy of deleting what you can't verify. With the dongle in place they may not be able to sign the log but with the code the system does the verification for you and they keep their well earned find.

Link to comment
When a cache is submitted using one of these devices the serial number of that dongle would need to be entered so that Groundspeak's system knows which one is in the cache and how to handle it.
Ah, that's the part I was missing. For some reason, I thought each geocacher would need to carry one of these devices. Instead, each "special" cache would need one of these devices. And of course, when this electronic device stops working, the cache could no longer be logged.

 

Unless we had a backup system. Maybe we could put a paper log in the "special" cache, and when the electronic device is no longer working, finders could just sign the paper log.

Link to comment
When a cache is submitted using one of these devices the serial number of that dongle would need to be entered so that Groundspeak's system knows which one is in the cache and how to handle it.
Ah, that's the part I was missing. For some reason, I thought each geocacher would need to carry one of these devices. Instead, each "special" cache would need one of these devices. And of course, when this electronic device stops working, the cache could no longer be logged.

 

Unless we had a backup system. Maybe we could put a paper log in the "special" cache, and when the electronic device is no longer working, finders could just sign the paper log.

 

Yes, yes it could fail, so could a pen, or a pencil or the o ring on a cache container or the power or the bus company or the dog, the dog failed to bring me my beer. The oven could fail and I miss out on tea, the sun! The sun is going to fail one day.

 

Options for if a CO feels that paper isn't the best in a given situation rather than forcing anything on anyone.

Link to comment
You cannot sit at Home entering codes as each code is only good for say five minutes before the required code to log the cache changes and at any given time the codes are different across different dongles. Think of it as a random number except that Groundspeak's system knows what that number is supposed to be at that time.

So you'd HAVE to log it on site, and couldn't wait until you get home? Ugh. No thanks. I don't use the Internet while out caching.

 

If it sits for long enough it is impossible to stop the paper log from getting soggy. Also by removing the major source of readily metabolized carbohydrates you'll probably find less mould in caches as well.

Except you're talking about putting them in caches WITH log books. The carbohydrates would still be there.

 

You know I just read the thread title properly and saw that the OP is talking about micros and he's right, an alternative to paper in micros would be useful.

Would this dongle fit in nano and micro caches?

Edited by TriciaG
Link to comment

You could *still* cheat with this overly complicated 4 digit dongle method

 

I found cache GCxxx on1/1/14 @1330. Code was 1234

 

Done. Spread the word. And the word will spread indeed.

 

So much money, time, steps... And it makes cheating easier

 

OR...we could just hide better caches and less micros if it is mainly maintenance too hard for some to handle. And use a pencil

Link to comment

Would this dongle fit in nano and micro caches?

I guess I had what Tassie Boy's talking of for a couple years (for work).

Little gizmo called a key fob that was about the size of a usb flash drive with an led window on the side.

In order to log in at work, you needed to type in the number shown (and your password), whiched changed every minute.

Changed programs, no longer needed.

They may make 'em smaller, but I'd bet nanos are out. For me, that may not be a bad thing.

Link to comment

Would this dongle fit in nano and micro caches?

I guess I had what Tassie Boy's talking of for a couple years (for work).

Little gizmo called a key fob that was about the size of a usb flash drive with an led window on the side.

In order to log in at work, you needed to type in the number shown (and your password), whiched changed every minute.

Changed programs, no longer needed.

They may make 'em smaller, but I'd bet nanos are out. For me, that may not be a bad thing.

 

Picking out the flaws in these alternative logbook ideas is fun. laughing.gif

 

Wouldn't the cache listing have to be set up so that it knows that at 5:46pm the code was 16948, then at 5:47pm it was 98483. If there wasn't a code-sensitive app on the cache listing, what stops someone from claiming the code at 5:46pm was 87875?

 

Paper is still looking like the best, simpliest and least costly 'recording device' for a cache.

Link to comment
So when I hop on my bike and to 30-40 caches in a day I have to write down the code for each each. Give me a break.
Not only do you need to write down the ever-changing code, but you also need to record the exact time when you saw the ever-changing code. Presumably the time would also be displayed by the dongle, because you can't trust everyone who finds the cache to have a watch that is accurate to the minute. Or if the time stored by the dongle drifts, you can't trust everyone who finds the cache to have a watch that has drifted exactly the same amount as the dongle.
Link to comment
So when I hop on my bike and to 30-40 caches in a day I have to write down the code for each each. Give me a break.
Not only do you need to write down the ever-changing code, but you also need to record the exact time when you saw the ever-changing code. Presumably the time would also be displayed by the dongle, because you can't trust everyone who finds the cache to have a watch that is accurate to the minute. Or if the time stored by the dongle drifts, you can't trust everyone who finds the cache to have a watch that has drifted exactly the same amount as the dongle.

 

GC ought to just research and develop self-logging caches...meaning the cache has an internet connection and forces the finder to log into the GC.com site via the secure cache connection. Doing so adds a unique verification stamp to each log.

 

There. Simple solution. Paper be damned!

Link to comment
You cannot sit at Home entering codes as each code is only good for say five minutes before the required code to log the cache changes and at any given time the codes are different across different dongles. Think of it as a random number except that Groundspeak's system knows what that number is supposed to be at that time.

So you'd HAVE to log it on site, and couldn't wait until you get home? Ugh. No thanks. I don't use the Internet while out caching.

 

Getting it from the cache site to the internet access device of your choice is your problem. May I suggest that GPS units probably have some note saving functionality for waypoints? Write it on your lover's thigh? Call a mate with a pilots licence to skywrite it?

 

If it sits for long enough it is impossible to stop the paper log from getting soggy. Also by removing the major source of readily metabolized carbohydrates you'll probably find less mould in caches as well.

Except you're talking about putting them in caches WITH log books. The carbohydrates would still be there.

 

That is one situation where you could consider leaving the logbook out altogether.

 

You know I just read the thread title properly and saw that the OP is talking about micros and he's right, an alternative to paper in micros would be useful.

Would this dongle fit in nano and micro caches?

 

I assume almost definately for micro's and maybe for nano's. Don't know, I don't build them.

 

You could *still* cheat with this overly complicated 4 digit dongle method

 

I found cache GCxxx on1/1/14 @1330. Code was 1234

 

Done. Spread the word. And the word will spread indeed.

 

So much money, time, steps... And it makes cheating easier

 

OR...we could just hide better caches and less micros if it is mainly maintenance too hard for some to handle. And use a pencil

 

And its still going to look suss when many different logs turn up from the same 5 minute window months and years down the track.

 

Picking out the flaws in these alternative logbook ideas is fun. laughing.gif

 

Wouldn't the cache listing have to be set up so that it knows that at 5:46pm the code was 16948, then at 5:47pm it was 98483. If there wasn't a code-sensitive app on the cache listing, what stops someone from claiming the code at 5:46pm was 87875?

 

Paper is still looking like the best, simpliest and least costly 'recording device' for a cache.

 

To impliment it properly GS would have to integrate it into the GC.com system. Big changes I know but also business oppourtunities for them.

Link to comment
To impliment it properly GS would have to integrate it into the GC.com system. Big changes I know but also business oppourtunities for them.
Or they could sell Rite in the Rain weatherproof log books for less than $5 each, and not need to change the site at all. Think of all the development resources freed up for more useful changes to the site!
Link to comment

 

You could *still* cheat with this overly complicated 4 digit dongle method

 

I found cache GCxxx on1/1/14 @1330. Code was 1234

 

Done. Spread the word. And the word will spread indeed.

 

So much money, time, steps... And it makes cheating easier

 

OR...we could just hide better caches and less micros if it is mainly maintenance too hard for some to handle. And use a pencil

 

And its still going to look suss when many different logs turn up from the same 5 minute window months and years down the track.

 

 

Who cares how it looks?

If everyone has a valid code...then it's all good. Valid code, valid find.

Link to comment

They are already using this idea for Lab caches, which are temporary at mega events. As for regular caches, it will only cause more "cheating", as cachers will share the codes like they do with coins and TBs. How about just signing the log and not worrying about any "cheating"? ;)

 

This was the post that I meant to put in this thread a few days ago, but it ended up elsewhere. :huh:

Link to comment
Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.
So how is this an improvement over the low-tech solution of a physical log and a pen/pencil? What is the problem that this electronic "one time pad" is trying to solve?

It's to solve the "problem" that we must eliminate low-tech wherever we find it. :rolleyes:

Pretty much.

 

So long as geocaching is fun, informal activity there is really no need for high tech. In fact it could be argued that you don't even need paper logs and simply go by the honor system for logging online. This is, in fact, what most cache owners do.

 

There are a few who seem to want a more formal and serious style of play. The may even view find counts as some kind of score. Using a found log online when you didn't actually find the cache or sign a physical log is to these people nothing but pure and simple cheating. They are looking for technology that eliminates the problems you sometimes have if the log book is full or too wet or your pen malfunctions. Of course whatever technology is used can also malfunction. So none of these ideas are really a workable solution. In addition, short of all geocachers being implanted with an RFID chip or registering their biometric signatures somewhere, these ideas won't eliminate cheating.

 

My suggestion for the those who keep recommending technical solutions for the problems with paper logs, is to get more comfortable underwear.

Link to comment

You know, as a CO, if you really want to implement something like this, you can. Just put in your container a little slip with a code and note on it saying that - "if you don't have a pen, don't worry! Just contact me with this code after you post your find, and I'll allow you to log this cache found!".

 

No need to force a system-wide modification to automate the process.

 

As a CO you're given the power to delete (or leave) find logs where a signature is not in the physical logbook (primarily to clean up false finds online). So, offer this option on your caches for cachers in those cases where legitimate finds are made, even though a signature isn't in the logbook.

 

I really like this idea!! Subject to the same potential for loss of the physical slip itself, but it would over-ride the wet, full, no pen, log missing excuses.

 

I'm sure someone will squeal it could be considered an ALR though.dry.gif

 

Would surely shorten the Found it- Didn't find it thread!!:lol:

 

 

 

I like the idea as well. There wouldn't be an ALR issue because using the code would optional and only necessary if, for some reason, someone couldn't sign the log book.

Link to comment

I keep telling myself one day I'm going to cut up a Tyvek Fedex envelope to use as a log sheet and just stick a couple Sharpies in the cache. Boom...log no longer saturated.

 

I've used cut strips from a Tyvek envelope on a couple of small bison tube caches that have used damp log issues. So far, no complaints about wet logs, but someone wrote that they couldn't get their pen to write on the "weird paper".

 

 

Link to comment
Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.
So how is this an improvement over the low-tech solution of a physical log and a pen/pencil? What is the problem that this electronic "one time pad" is trying to solve?

It's to solve the "problem" that we must eliminate low-tech wherever we find it. :rolleyes:

 

As I say just an idea for the issues raised against the op's suggestion, I'm personally Fine with pen and paper but do find it amazing that for a hobby that relies on satellites telling computers where on earth we are that every time a topic like this comes up the overwhelming result is a loud cry of "keep it low tech"

 

The use of an electronic one time pad would certainly make throwdowns a lot more expensive.

 

You know, I have to wonder if one of the attractions about geocaching for some is the mix of high and low tech. Yes, we use satellites and hand held receivers that fit in our pockets to figure out where we are and how to get to where we want to be, but then we're using our own two feet (or a self propelled wheel chair) to get to the location, use our eyes and hands and crawl around on our hands and knees to locate the container. We get wet, muddy, and cold and we like it.

 

Maybe someday we'll all sit in comfy chairs with a laptop or tablet and send coordinates to our personal robotic drone that will find the cache, use RFID to identifiy it, then post an online log sharing it's experience, but that won't be geocaching.

 

I also note that it's not, as some would like us to believe, a bunch of luddites that want to keep it simple. It's also people well versed with technology that understand that just because something can be solved with technology doesn't mean it should be solved with technology. In my case, I've been working with technology as an occupation since 1975 when I was testing Pong games for Atari, so to suggest that wanting to keep it low tech makes me a luddite is ludicrous.

 

 

Link to comment

Thinking outside the box a little that would solve the "code ending up on the internet" problem and also the "they're getting so small it's bloody stupid" problem.

 

Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.

 

The above devices are time based, requiring the user to use the code within a specific set time period (like 30 seconds) before the code changes. People who don't log the find using a phone would not be able to log the cache as the code would have changed multiple times before they log it.

Link to comment
Of course, for those not interested in e-logging their geocache finds, none of these examples are problems.
Good point. I already know people who don't log their finds online (for various reasons). A complex logging system like many of the ones proposed in this thread would just give more people incentive not to log finds online.
Link to comment
Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.
So how is this an improvement over the low-tech solution of a physical log and a pen/pencil? What is the problem that this electronic "one time pad" is trying to solve?

It's to solve the "problem" that we must eliminate low-tech wherever we find it. :rolleyes:

Pretty much.

 

So long as geocaching is fun, informal activity there is really no need for high tech. In fact it could be argued that you don't even need paper logs and simply go by the honor system for logging online. This is, in fact, what most cache owners do.

 

There are a few who seem to want a more formal and serious style of play. The may even view find counts as some kind of score. Using a found log online when you didn't actually find the cache or sign a physical log is to these people nothing but pure and simple cheating. They are looking for technology that eliminates the problems you sometimes have if the log book is full or too wet or your pen malfunctions. Of course whatever technology is used can also malfunction. So none of these ideas are really a workable solution. In addition, short of all geocachers being implanted with an RFID chip or registering their biometric signatures somewhere, these ideas won't eliminate cheating.

 

My suggestion for the those who keep recommending technical solutions for the problems with paper logs, is to get more comfortable underwear.

 

The honour system is a great thing but out relies on two things for it to operate, one party to be trust-worthy and another party to be trust-ful. We know that in this community groups exist that may not fall into one of those categories or the other. We know this because every so often a thread comes up and it runs somewhere along the lines of:

"There's a log on my cache page that isn't on the paper log! Can I get this person banned?"

Ok so maybe that's a little extreme but you get the point. This group is not trustful of all those that have logged on the cache page.

At the opposite end of that is the "found= didn't find" thread, which is up to 50 pages now. That's fifty Pages of people who are not trustworthy enough to use the correct log. Like it or not the people in that first group are concerned about the accuracy of the logs for their cache. With the current mantra being "you play the game your way and and I'll play it mine", an owner with concerns about the accuracy of their logs is just as valid as a hunter who chases their own statistics and don't they get precious about them! Why not give an owner the assurance they need by letting them "play the game their way" and have another for off verification of logs. It is doable, I had my idea picked to pieces but it was only nit picking of an idea only and it would work, yes it could fail but any system can fail, even paper.

 

It seems to me that people are just flat out against change. I understand that some may be afraid that the game may degrade into another version of munzee but nobody is suggesting that caches listed on this site be placed less than the 160m which is currently required, nor is anybody suggesting that logging on the cache page be reduced to pressing the found it button and walking away.

At work earlier this week we got talking about our colleges in the area and how they go about their business, expecting different results but doing the same thing season after season. We came to the conclusion that in an industry that is already stuck on ideas of traditionalism that they do these things because that's the way they do them and they can't tell you why they do it that way. Ditto here, we log at GZ on paper because that's what's always been done. We use a dedicated GPS (this one has died out since everyone has been distracted with the intro app but still the same idea) rather than a phone because that's what we use, even though they are slowly morphing to become one and the same. We hate power trails because they offend us for some reason even though nobody is holding a gun to your head to play that game.

 

Ideas like alternates to the traditional paper log come up all the time and people need to remember this is an evolving game. We can, if we want to, access a website from the middle of a paddock to find any of a number of different cache types in any part of the world. A long way from details of where a bucket was placed sent out to a select email list ten years ago.

Help shape the game over the next ten years by providing so constructive help rather than the inevitable "pfft never work, just use paper".

Link to comment

Thinking outside the box a little that would solve the "code ending up on the internet" problem and also the "they're getting so small it's bloody stupid" problem.

 

Some banks distribute a small dongle for use when banking on the internet, GS could sell something similar that produces a unique code based on the time that the cache is found. Think of it as an electronic "one time pad". So if you go to log your find on the website or the app and the code you input does not match the time you select that you found the cache then the result is no smilie.

 

The above devices are time based, requiring the user to use the code within a specific set time period (like 30 seconds) before the code changes. People who don't log the find using a phone would not be able to log the cache as the code would have changed multiple times before they log it.

 

Again, if there was a field to submit the time when you found the cache on the log submission page you would do away with the need to log it there and then.

 

Change every 5 minutes rather than 30 seconds would help with watch inaccuracies.

 

For those worries about the codes ending up on the net, make them single use, once a code has been used to log it cannot be used again. If you're worried about groups needing to wait stopping forever so they can all log with own accounts then allow it to dot out 5 single use codes in 5 minutes.

Link to comment

It all presupposes that COs really care. Most, I assure you, do not...at least not nearly enough to warrant the costs involved.

 

It's not about resisting change so much as resisting change just for the sake of change. I see nothing wrong with using bruce's suggestion of offering the option of providing the code in the event of a soaked log. To me, that's the only thing about this whole thread that seems worth implementing.

Link to comment
For those worries about the codes ending up on the net, make them single use, once a code has been used to log it cannot be used again. If you're worried about groups needing to wait stopping forever so they can all log with own accounts then allow it to dot out 5 single use codes in 5 minutes.
So a group of a couple dozen people (BTDT) would have to wait nearly half an hour, checking the dongle every minute, just to get enough of these single use codes so everyone could log online. And if we don't have that much time before the park closes, then some of the people who participated in our multi-stage puzzle night cache adventure don't get to log it online?

 

Or we could pass around a paper log and be on our way back to the trailhead in a few minutes.

 

So, how do these electronic single-use codes really improve anything? I can see how they would change things. I just can't see how they would improve anything.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...