Optional Paper Log Free Micro Caches

[+thebruce0]

The problem is not about change... it's that the suggested change is a required one for all players. That simply won't fly. Alternate suggestions are ways to keep the game accessible as is (if it ain't broke) while providing ways for the more stringent players to focus on reliability and accuracy about logging.

 

Again, the variant I suggest is simply that for CO's who care, provide that unique code within the cache that, if you want to make sure a cacher has actually found your cache even though their name isn't on the sheet, they can tell you the code as proof they found it. Any 'cheating' brought on by that would be no more 'cheating' than if the code never existed anyway. It can only reduce the amount of bad logs, or make it easier to verify them.

 

That variant does not require all this extra work, technology, complication, and cost forced on every player and owner, let alone those who would have no idea how to make the process work for them. Simplicity. A GPS points you to where you want to go. You get there and search. In a container you find a piece of paper, and sign your name. If you want you can go online and log it found. Any more complicated than this process and you dramatically raise the barrier to entry. As simply as it seems to technologically savvy people, it can be confusing to lay people. Geocaching is popular because it's an easy hobby to pick up, compared to some others in this class.

 

M* is a game much closer to that level of technology use for logging... a far more technological game, and I'd wager the average knowledge of its players is far higher than geocaching in general - because it attracts that type of person in the first place. Geocaching, fundamentally, doesn't.

 

I still maintain that this lack of technology requirement is what separates geocaching as a hobby from all these other location-based mobile games.

 

If the CO cares that much about invalid finds on their cache, they can implement their own 'check' for those situations with no logbook signature. Even if it's as little as contacting the finder and asking them to describe the container and hide. There's your evidence. Yep, it's still honour system, but at least you have a much better chance of refuting fake logs.

[+niraD]

So far, this idea has grown from a cache owner needing to place a laminated 4-digit code number in his cache, to now needing some sort of electronic code/time-stamp generating device in his cache. What's next in this evolution?

Biometric authentication, of course...

[+J Grouchy]

So far, this idea has grown from a cache owner needing to place a laminated 4-digit code number in his cache, to now needing some sort of electronic code/time-stamp generating device in his cache. What's next in this evolution?

Biometric authentication, of course...

 

NO! Then folks will be cutting off other, more prolific, cachers' hands just to get the smilies!

[+K13]

Electronic devices and then Biometric authenticators....Sounds like there may be cries of Class Warfare on the horizon. We best nip this in the bud, or just limit the technology to the Platinum Members.

[+JesandTodd]

I had a blackberry thorn break off smack dab in the middle of my pointer finger last week while DNFing a multi!! Still there (ouch). Anyhow..it interfered with my ability to log into Pyxis for one day (fingerprint biometric reader)

 

So...hopefully the future generation of biometric geo-log readers takes onto account thorns...mud...leaves...blood, and the like.

 

Perhaps a DNA sample?

[team tisri]

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.

 

Even a log book doesn't prove anything. If you go out caching with a friend one of you finds it and signs the log for both of you. Who is to know whether the friend was there or not?

 

There really isn't any point trying to engineer more and more clever solutions to stop people claiming finds on caches they never really found, simply because the burden of verification ends up becoming a chore. The point of geocaching is to have some fun, not endlessly jump through hoops verifying that someone else played the game just as we want them to.

[DannyCaffeine]

Not everyone owns a smartphone.

[+woodsters]

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.

 

Ditto