Place your own Lab Cache!?!?!

[+funkymunkyzone]

OK, enough about our site moderator. Do you plan on taking part in the new Lab caches? I know little about them, but I take part in about everything else that Groundspeak offers.

 

So far I have found some lab caches and I have organised the creation of some. Yes I'll probably create one of these ones and if someone wants to create one for me, I'll find it, and I'll report back my constructive feedback.

 

I'm curious about these new ones, but they so far sound very much like the temporary mega event caches (which you also needed the URL in order to find them, and they were also time limited), the difference here being there's only one find and then they close.

[+Manville Possum]

OK, enough about our site moderator. Do you plan on taking part in the new Lab caches? I know little about them, but I take part in about everything else that Groundspeak offers.

 

So far I have found some lab caches and I have organised the creation of some. Yes I'll probably create one of these ones and if someone wants to create one for me, I'll find it, and I'll report back my constructive feedback.

 

I'm curious about these new ones, but they so far sound very much like the temporary mega event caches (which you also needed the URL in order to find them, and they were also time limited), the difference here being there's only one find and then they close.

Wow! Very impressive stats. I don't get to see much of the World anymore, but my son and I did attend a Mega near home last fall and we took the historic walking tour of Matewan, West Virginia. Most impressive was the Lab cache at the Benchmark where the bullet holes from the 1920 Battle of Matewan were in the side of a building. Sheriff Sid Hatfield was there describing the battle, I guess it is just the fact that I love history and can use geocaching to convey it to others. One thing I did note about the Matewan Lab caches, quite a bit of cheating went on. The pass codes were posted on FB geocaching groups.

I get the idea of the one time find on these Lab caches, it tells me it is a common request and I see it often on another listing service.

[+Armsey]

This sounds great, can't wait!

[+wimseyguy]

I have found lab caches at three different locations now, and been a bit underwhelmed. What I have found weren't all that well thought out and were quickly placed for the mega event taking place so attendees could get a new cool icon for their profiles. So far I've just seen a mix of trads and virts that were mashups of a codeword temporary event cache. Other than a lack of concern for the guidelines I haven't really seen anything separating a lab cache from any other.

 

But the lack of structure for the lab cache allows hiders to show a lot more creativity than what I have seen. There is another thread in here about creating an FM transmitter cache-that could be a lab cache if the CO didn't want to leave it up for more than 3 months. I remember talk of a remote control submarine cache back in the day. I've seen discussions of elaborate electronic constructions that would make awesome caches, but cannot withstand the elements for three months, so they never got deployed as a cache. We had a cache hidden here with a lot of LED's and some mechanical devices, but it was muggled before I could find it and was archived. Perhaps that would have worked better as a one time lab cache? I'm more of a finder than a hider and don't have any great ideas of my own right now, but have seen plenty of neat stuff discussed in here over the years to know that some really out of the box concepts can be tested on the lab cache bench.

 

I'm a bit miffed at the partial integration into the stats approach, but it won't keep me from finding more lab caches if they are in my path. I like finding caches more than I like looking at my stats.

[+irisisleuk]

I've "found" some Labcaches in the past, but I didn't really since they were thousands of miles away, but by doing some searching on the internet (streetview, posted photos etc) I could find the codewords. I just wanted to see what they were, or are, at the moment.

To me they are the same as virtual caches (you go to a place and find the answer(s) except for one important thing: writing a log.

 

With the introduction of apps, cachers seem to think writing a log is just to notify you've found the cache, so they think a TFTC-log is sufficient. But to me the main difference between geocaching and any other game where you use your gps/phone to find something, is the writing or receiving a log.

 

It is not (or it was not) about the number of founds, but about the fun/exciting/new/etc. experience you had while going out geocaching. And that story is what you share about the geocache in a log, not just for yourself but also for other geocachers and last but not least: the CO. Of course if the game is not about having a great day out anymore, but just about scoring points for statistics, no log is needed, a TFTC will be more than sufficient.

 

So although I like how lab caches are used to try out new ideas, I really dislike how they now stimulate/promote the no-need-to-write-a-log trend of this game. Every CO who spends time to make something more than just a throw down dislikes (to put it nicely) the TFTC or bath logs.

I've seen CO's stop making caches because of these "logs". Throw downs are being placed instead, resulting in more TFTC logs and more newbies who think that's all you need to log, because that's what they see all the time. What will be the effect of lab caches where no log is needed?

 

So please please please don't forget writing/receiving a log is an important part of this game (to me)!

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

The cache can only be "found" by the first account that enters the confirmation code -- that is, your intended recipient -- your spouse, significant other, child, parent, caching buddy, co-worker, etc.

 

Does the lab cache need to be "private", with only only a single intended recipient? Or can they be "published" such that any and all can see and try to log?

[cezanne]

A Lab Cache is an experimental and extremely rare geocache type

 

Maybe I got something wrong. I need to admit that I have often troubles with the American way of being enthusiastic. Allowing every PM to hide one such cache seems to me to be contradiction to the "extreme rarity".

 

Cezanne

Edited January 28, 2014 by cezanne

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

A Lab Cache is an experimental and extremely rare geocache type

 

Maybe I got something wrong. I need to admit that I have often troubles with the American way of being enthusiastic. Allowing every PM to hide one such cache seems to me to be contradiction to the "extreme rarity".

 

Cezanne

 

I was actually thnking the same thing. Especially if friends create nice easy ones for each other, just to get the icon in the "Hide" and "Found" columns. Which is very likely to happen.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

The cache can only be "found" by the first account that enters the confirmation code -- that is, your intended recipient -- your spouse, significant other, child, parent, caching buddy, co-worker, etc.

 

Does the lab cache need to be "private", with only only a single intended recipient? Or can they be "published" such that any and all can see and try to log?

 

From what I read, and heard so far, the new lab cache can be "published" by giving someone, or anyone, a URL. For example, you could post the URL here, on your local geocaching clubs mailing list, or on craigslist. However, once someone has found it and has entered the code word, the cache has been found and nobody else will be able to log it as found. Such a manifestation of the new lab cache will likely be popular in areas where the FTF game is popular.

 

One thing I haven't seen mentioned at all, which is odd since the announcement of the CITO 2014 souvenir was just made, was that the CO should CITO their container (if they used one) once it has been found.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

The cache can only be "found" by the first account that enters the confirmation code -- that is, your intended recipient -- your spouse, significant other, child, parent, caching buddy, co-worker, etc.

 

Does the lab cache need to be "private", with only only a single intended recipient? Or can they be "published" such that any and all can see and try to log?

 

From what I read, and heard so far, the new lab cache can be "published" by giving someone, or anyone, a URL. For example, you could post the URL here, on your local geocaching clubs mailing list, or on craigslist. However, once someone has found it and has entered the code word, the cache has been found and nobody else will be able to log it as found. Such a manifestation of the new lab cache will likely be popular in areas where the FTF game is popular.

 

I am hoping anyone can find it. You could have a lot of fun with this. I am also hoping you can bound when the code can be entered to a specific date and time range. Could make things very interesting, especially if the code word is not obvious, or something must be solved to get it.

[cezanne]

cezanne, if I were local to you (and locally knowledgable) I could set up a Lab Cache for you. I'd think about the kind of walking tour multi-cache with points of interest that you seem to enjoy.

advantages It doesn't need any container, I could build the logging codeword from information in various stops. I don't have to struggle to get a container placed in an environment that's not suited to it. OR, if I did want a container, I can ignore cache saturation, I can use something that might be to theme, but too fragile for regular cache use. I can put the container indoors, all or part of the cache could be indoors.

 

I agree with what you wrote above, but I still cannot see the advantage of making such a cache available only to a single person. If I want to offer a present to a single person, I rather do that outside of geocaching. The single person concept, regardless of whether set up as a race or as a present to a special person where the others will learn about the lab cache only after it got found already, does not appeal to me.

 

I cannot help but it seems to me that the main focus is not about getting an impression of the ideas with which people come up, but somehow to announce something new from time to time.

 

Let's see which lab caches will show up. My current impression might be biased by statements like this

 

The OFFICIAL announcement will happen on February 3rd, with all the pomp and circumstance of a proper, exciting HQ announcement.

 

and the iterative usage of terms like cool which I do not appreciate at all. I'm aware of cultural differences though and know that statements like the one above by Jayme are meant differently than as I perceive them.

 

 

In my limited experience with Lab Caches (I've found them at 2 Mega Events) their primary weakness is the lack of an online log.

 

I have not found any lab cache, but this lack of a log and the increasing trend to TFTC logs also bother me very much. More and more cachers tend to think the logs are just to claim a find and serve no other purpose.

The M.... site that one should not talk about here is for me the prime example of a real nightmare. It's all about scores, battles, new types and icons every few weeks - no logs, no descriptions telling anything about the locations etc

 

 

Cezanne

[+Murazor]

• These hides will not add to your hide count.

 

Now this is wise. It prevents abuses.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

The cache can only be "found" by the first account that enters the confirmation code -- that is, your intended recipient -- your spouse, significant other, child, parent, caching buddy, co-worker, etc.

 

Does the lab cache need to be "private", with only only a single intended recipient? Or can they be "published" such that any and all can see and try to log?

 

From what I read, and heard so far, the new lab cache can be "published" by giving someone, or anyone, a URL. For example, you could post the URL here, on your local geocaching clubs mailing list, or on craigslist. However, once someone has found it and has entered the code word, the cache has been found and nobody else will be able to log it as found. Such a manifestation of the new lab cache will likely be popular in areas where the FTF game is popular.

 

I am hoping anyone can find it. You could have a lot of fun with this. I am also hoping you can bound when the code can be entered to a specific date and time range. Could make things very interesting, especially if the code word is not obvious, or something must be solved to get it.

 

As I said, the impression that I got was that anyone can find it, but once it's found, the "cache" is "locked". It sounds like it basically boils down to "hiding" a code word and the first person to find it get to claim the find. There doesn't seem to be any constraints on how that code word is hidden, nor how many people you share the URL with that will allow someone to start the adventure to look for the code word.

 

Personally I prefer the idea of broadcasting the URL so that anyone can find it rather than only giving to one person. While mentioning the idea that someone might hide a lab cache for just one person because it contains a marriage proposal might be charming, limiting the sharing of the URL to only one person or a small group could quickly turn this into a popularity contest. The new cacher that hasn't met a lot of others in the local community someone that lives in an area which seems to have an "in-crowd" (yes, I've heard of a few places like this) might get left out of the fun.

 

[cezanne]

When I hear geocaching I have interesting places, scenic views, peaceful landscapes and gorgeous hikes in mind and not things like game, fun, loud laughter, mega, cool, experiments etc

 

Sorry to hear that you don't associate geocaching with fun. If I didn't have fun doing it, I wouldn't be doing it.

 

You do not need to feel sorry for me. I guess that not everyone has the same concept of fun. There are certainly many caches that I enjoy. Apart from scenic hikes I have mentioned above, I also like to visit e.g. caches that deal with sad episodes of history and make me learn more about those times. It feels wrong to say that I visit those caches for the fun of it. I'm aware of the fact that quite a number of people regard geocaching as a light entertainment activity that should only deal with the bright sides of life, but I do not share this view.

 

Moreover, my approach to geocaching is one motivated by physical activity and by learning about things I have not known before. The game aspect (both from the competition side of view and the innovative, PC game and role game aspect) and the social aspect play no role for me. I do not enjoy the hide and seek aspect of the game and prefer standard hideouts by far to the most creative camouflages or containers. On top of all that I have an aversion against the word "cool" and this word comes up surprisingly often when Groundspeak comes up with something new.

I liked geocaching the most as it has been in the early times. I'm personally not eagerly waiting for innovations.

 

I do not mind if others enjoy lab caches as long as it does not effect my own geocaching experience (a further deterioration of log quality e.g. would have negative effects on me).

 

Cezanne

[+puczmeloun]

funkymunkyzone, what you are describing would be a fully-integrated, new geocache type. Lab caches are still in the Laboratory. They aren't launched with a full feature set. If "special caches for Mega-Events" or "one time only private caches" ever become geocache types, then we might see full integration with statistics, profiles, etc.

 

Hope that it will be really full integration, when cache page will be like normal cache, just with another icon. Remembered GS Challenges, where lack of classical GC tools and information were their main problem...

[+NYPaddleCacher]

funkymunkyzone, what you are describing would be a fully-integrated, new geocache type. Lab caches are still in the Laboratory. They aren't launched with a full feature set. If "special caches for Mega-Events" or "one time only private caches" ever become geocache types, then we might see full integration with statistics, profiles, etc.

 

Hope that it will be really full integration, when cache page will be like normal cache, just with another icon. Remembered GS Challenges, where lack of classical GC tools and information were their main problem...

 

Agreed. I also remember that when the first lab caches came out that were only available at the block party and subsequent mega events that the biggest complaint was that they messed up ones stats. It seemed that the only option then, and now, was that once could delete the lab cache from their "finds". I think it would make more sense to allow users to find a lab cache and choose whether or not it was counted. That way, we could still participate in the experiment (and get the icon to indicate that we did) but it wouldn't mess up our statistics.

 

I haven't done any lab caches, but so far I haven't been any where close to a mega event (and the block party is 2200 miles away) to get the opportunity.

[Clan Riffster]

Why in the world would a lab cache be a "not chosen" size

Perhaps the better question should be, "Why wouldn't they?". Granted, I'm not a fan of 'not chosen' or 'other', as, locally, those terms mostly translate to 'micro', once the cache is found. But I digress. If I hide a lab cache, should I not have the option of telling the seeker(s) what size container they are hunting, if I opt to use a container?

 

or have difficulty 1/1?

Again, why not? True, if I were to create a lab cache, I'm much more likely to make it a 5/5 than a 1/1, (the world has enough boring P&Gs, in my opinion), and I would hope there would be some way to convey the D/T to whoever hunts it, so they can be prepared.

 

You are wanting to create a statistic for something that doesn't have a value.

If a lab cache truly has no value, why are folks finding them? If they have no value, why are folks excited over the opportunity to hide them? Perhaps you're using 'value' in a different context? If so, I'd suggest your logic is circular. If lab caches were assigned data fields such as size and D/T, and they affected your find count properly, then the statistical value would be present. Would that cause you any harm?

 

When I attended Cacheapalooza, I located four lab caches. My experience in locating them was identical to finding a traditional, (other than the medium providing the coords), in that I went to a specific geographic location, noted by GPS coordinates, then hunted for a container. If I were to describe this behavior to most folks in here, they would likely define it as caching. I know I would. If I am finding caches, should I not get full credit for them?

 

As far as I'm concerned doing that would mess up my stats.

And not counting them, fully, messes up my stats.

 

Sorry, but IMO being OCD about geocaching statistics is a bit silly

Sorry, but telling others what should matter, to them, is a bit silly.

[+ChileHead]

Thanks for the information. Will there be plans on having lab caches like this (outside of megas) that allow for more than 1 person to "find" it?

 

I can think of many creative and innovative ways to set up a lab cache, but I'm unlikely to spend the time and effort and possibly money setting up a unique experience for one person. It would be nice to see these February lab caches be good for the entire month, not just for one person, so you would encourage more of the creative hiders to come up with something really cool.

 

For anybody looking for something different to try for a lab cache, feel free to create a "mob" cache:

http://chilehead.us/mob

 

This is a simple mobile web application I developed last summer with the intent of using it for a lab cache. It allows you to set up a location where you need to get a specified number of people within a specified radius of the location using smart phones before a message is revealed. The message can be anything - coordinates to a cache, or the keyword for the lab cache. It works best as a temporary event cache vs a permanent cache (though there are about a dozen of these published world wide), and I'm not sure how good it would work if only one person is allowed to log the lab cache.

[+fuchslein]

 

We don't expect everyone to want to try them or like them, but we are hoping for the community's feedback. There will be surveys posted that both the hider and finder can complete about the experience.

 

Like I said, I am happy to answer questions that you may have about the Lab Caches or I <3 Geocaching. Please keep questions and comments constructive - they speak the loudest to us and get remembered during development meetings. Deliberately negative comments tend not to accomplish those goals, unfortunately.

 

Alright...I'm done. Let's hear questions and have some good discussion.

 

Some feedback. I think that the idea of the cache that can be found by only one person, is right one to add "insider clicks". Even without them, there's cases where some cachers make "insider-caches" ( usually some D4 unknown cache ), and archive it immeadiately after some unknown or not a friend-cacher finds those caches. So this whole idea just seems "official" blessing to this kind of behaviour, and even gifting these insiders their own cache type!

 

What I like in geocaching, that everybody have an equal change to find every cache in the limits of their own physics and wits. Cachers are usually quite friendly towards each others, and even some are competitive, competition is "pure", except for the above mentioned cases. Since amount of the found labcaches is listed ( maybe even in statistics some day? ), there is always possiblity to do some doping with this cache type: -If I make 20 labcaches for you, would you do same for me, so we both have more than cacher X?

 

So in short, I don't like this new type of cache.

[Mr.Yuck]

I normally don't post on here but I would like to clear up a few things.

 

1. No this is not a hoax and a ploy for youtube revenue. Every time I have broke news about geocaching news I have verified it with Groundspeak. I am simply providing a service for those interested in what is happening in the geocaching world.

 

2. "Labs" are just an experiment. We should be thanking gc.com for allowing us to try some of their ideas. Let's just have fun with it. As far as this idea being "geocaching". Last I checked hiding a geocache for someone to go find is pretty much the whole concept of geocaching. If you really need a gpsr to go geocaching, then plug in the cords on your "lab" cache and go find it. Let's just have fun with it.

 

3. I'm sorry some find my videos "annoying". Just trying to be positive. :-)

 

 

Yeah, one guy, whom I sometimes find to be abrasive, saying "probably an attempt to make ad revenue on YT". And another guy who said your videos are "sometimes annoying". That's not too tough of a crowd. For the record, I said if it was you and The Doc, surely it was real.

 

Grumpyness about the lab caches themselves? That could be an "abrasive forum" thing too, but it does echo what I hear in the never come to the forums Geocaching community. They mess up your stats, and a lot of people are all meh about them. I don't think we'll ever see a universal "just have fun with it" concensus on anything new Groundspeak tries.

[+The Waysiders]

Here is our little spin on the February fun: I ♥ Geocaching Event

[+DanOCan]

• These finds will add a smiley to your find count, BUT will not count as a typical geocache would in your milestones and various other stats. (Just making sure everyone is aware that to keep a streak up you will need to find a non-labs geocache for a streaking day.)
  
• These hides will not add to your hide count.
  

This is the part that confuses me.

 

Something will add to my smiley count but not count in my statistics which are purely based on my smiley count. Then to really blow my mind, I can find something and add to my smiley count that apparently wasn't really hidden because it didn't show up in someone's hide count. Whoa!

 

Part of my constructive advice to Groundspeak is this:

 

Since Lab Caches are already experimental in nature and will generate a ton of questions as new ideas are floated in the lab, don't add to that confusion with this odd "hybrid" approach to the numbers. Either make them fully count as a new cache type, or make them like benchmarks where they will show up on your profile but not count in your Finds.

 

Right now I'm really not sure if I want to participate or not because my choices seem to be:

- Participate and mess up the relationship between my stats and find count

- Participate and then delete the lab cache from my profile and mess up my caching history on my profile

 

I don't particularly care for either choice. I'd like to see Groundspeak take a stand and either say "Yes, these experiments count as a cache; they just happen to be a new cache type we can choose to redefine at any time" or "It's like benchmarking -- we'll let you track it but because they are experimental they don't count as caches."

 

Right now, based on what I know, I'd like to see them treated as benchmarks.

[4wheelin_fool]

They don't count in the stats because Groundspeak full well knows that they shouldn't be counted at all as a find in the first place. They should take that carrot away and count them like benchmarks. They also are not "caches" in any shape or form, only in the name. Hiding one for just one person is just plain silly anyway. Other than that, it sounds like it could be a fun activity which could run alongside the game successfully, but calling them caches and having them boost the find count is absurd. It also will encourage people to not put any logsheets at all into caches.

[+Team Microdot]

there is always possiblity to do some doping with this cache type: -If I make 20 labcaches for you, would you do same for me, so we both have more than cacher X?

 

I thought about this happening too - Geocaching has always been an inclusive rather than exclusive game and while not every cache suits every cacher - they are out there to be found by anyone with the will and the skill.

 

At this early stage though I'm more curious about how much useful feedback Groundspeak think they are going to get by allowing one person to hide a lab cache for one other person, given that statistically (at least I'd be willing to wager a buck on it) they are likely to be reciprocal - friends setting them up for friends. That being the case I would expect a higher than average percentage of glowing reports - at least if anyone comes up with anything actually novel / interesting to do with them.

 

Beyond that I reckon most people will do it for the novelty value - and an icon - and then forget about it.

 

I think better or at least more rounded feedback would be gleaned from allowing more than one finder per idea. At least then people might invest more time and effort in coming up with something truly out of the ordinary - which is really the direction I think this should be taking given that to all other intents and purposes, the sky is the limit.

 

And yeah - it's not geocaching - or at least it's very different to what most of us are used to - but who says it has to end up being part of geocaching? Why not let it develop as a different GPS enabled game and let people opt into whichever games the enjoy?

[cezanne]

This is a simple mobile web application I developed last summer with the intent of using it for a lab cache. It allows you to set up a location where you need to get a specified number of people within a specified radius of the location using smart phones before a message is revealed. The message can be anything - coordinates to a cache, or the keyword for the lab cache. It works best as a temporary event cache vs a permanent cache (though there are about a dozen of these published world wide), and I'm not sure how good it would work if only one person is allowed to log the lab cache.

 

I do not like the one person concept anyhow. Your mob concept and similar other concepts that are around do not appeal to me due to their need for a smartphone.

Wherigos, chirps, etc added already too much technological restrictions to geocaching and I do not welcome an additional increase.

 

It also seems that sharing experiences of the hunt does not seem to play a big role in the mob concept either (similar to lab caches, the m.... game, Waymarking and other projects of a similar flavour). Only geocaching seemed to have a culture where the online logs were something valuable for what was once a considerable proportion of the community.

 

 

Cezanne

[+CanadianRockies]

I don't believe that lab caches will ever count in the statistics other than in the find count. What may happen is that some of the experiments will work well and may result in new cache types being added to the regular geocaching database. New caches of these types (but not the original experiments unless they are relisted and relogged) will count in your statistics.

According to the latest episode of PodCacher (at about 23:00), Groundspeak's goal is to incorporate lab caches into the statistics. Based on past experience, that could mean two months from now, two years from now, or never.

[+Team Microdot]

I don't believe that lab caches will ever count in the statistics other than in the find count. What may happen is that some of the experiments will work well and may result in new cache types being added to the regular geocaching database. New caches of these types (but not the original experiments unless they are relisted and relogged) will count in your statistics.

According to the latest episode of PodCacher (at about 23:00), Groundspeak's goal is to incorporate lab caches into the statistics. Based on past experience, that could mean two months from now, two years from now, or never.

 

And pushing for an answer could see one suddenly uninvited from the thread - so try to remain positive and embrace the mystery by imagining what a nice surprise it will be when it finally arrives

[+ArtieD]

We should be thanking gc.com for allowing us to try some of their ideas.

 

That might be true for you. I do know that I do not like the idea and I'm not interested at all into trying it out. Sure, it is Groundspeak's site. So they can decide what they offer there, but it's me who decides what I'm thankful for.

 

I do not feel annoyed by your video (actually I looked at it only for less than a minute), but I once again realized that's about a completely different world. When I hear geocaching I have interesting places, scenic views, peaceful landscapes and gorgeous hikes in mind and not things like game, fun, loud laughter, mega, cool, experiments etc

 

 

Cezanne

 

You must be the life of the party at events. You're always so upbeat and positive...

[+fuzziebear3]

Here is our little spin on the February fun: I ♥ Geocaching Event

 

I like that idea. I had a similar thought with what I want to do, but I chose just to randomly distribute my cache.

[cezanne]

You must be the life of the party at events. You're always so upbeat and positive...

 

That somehow gets a bit off-topic. Events are not a compulsory part of geocaching.

I do not attend events often and if I do I prefer small outdoor events where I feel comfortable which is not the case

for large indoor events. I'm certainly an introvert and part of the attraction of geocaching for me also comes from the fact that it

does not need to be a group activity and does not necessarily require interaction with people when it is not the right moment for me.

 

I'm not overly negative, but my geocaching interests are certainly more narrow than those of the majority and I also

have no issue if you refer to me as old fashioned and not interested into innovations as geocaching is regarded.

 

I think that I have written way more extremely positive logs for caches that I enjoyed enormously than the average participant in this forum

who belongs to the group that is perceived as positive just because their approach to geocaching is much wider than mine. Feedback from the cache owners demonstrate that the overly positive message was received by them and is

not just something I'm making up. A example from the last few months can be found here

http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC4QYJ5_rundwanderung-kulm-stubenberg

(My logs are in English, so you can read them.)

And my all time favourite geocache

http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC3EFT1_vulkanland?guid=bc6fc608-511d-4790-91a6-63898366b82c

provided me with many moments which felt like "I'm the happiest person on earth" for me. It was an overwhelming experience, but

certainly not something which I associate with playing a game.

 

I said before I do not mind if others are enthusiastic about lab caches - I simply do not share this enthusiasm at all and my concern about the negative effect on the log culture is not as issue of being positive/negative.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited January 28, 2014 by cezanne

[+CanadianRockies]

While I appreciate the flexibility that will be allowed lab cache hides, I do wonder if the gates might be opened too much. As I understand it, local, regional, and national laws must be obeyed and appropriate permission must be obtained. But most of the other guidelines apparently will be suspended for lab caches.

 

I might be able to dust off my multi-stage puzzle cache that involves a particular geocaching podcast site, which my reviewer declined to publish because the podcast isn't family friendly. Lab caches also could be placed inside strip clubs.

 

Lab caches will allow someone to hide a cache inside a local butcher shop (with permission). But they apparently also would allow that butcher shop owner to take the names of all geocacher customers who spend at least $25 and then hold a lottery at the end of February to determine which geocacher gets the codeword.

 

A lab cache might require someone to get the word from the top-right corner of the Union for International Cancer Control's website homepage. But another lab cache might require someone to get the first word on the front of the lifetime membership card of a neo-Nazi group.

 

Can lab caches be buried? Can one screw a board with a codeword into a tree? Can lab cache containers be placed near schools? airports? dams? highway bridges? military facilities? Can a lab cache be placed in an ancient British dry wall? Can I place the codeword amongst a bunch of live wires at the base of a lamppost? The list goes on.

 

Hopefully, most geocachers will use some common sense when creating their lab caches. But I can almost guarantee that some geocachers will take advantage of this opportunity to push the limits beyond where Groundspeak would like them to go.

Edited January 28, 2014 by CanadianRockies

[+ChileHead]

As I understand it, local, regional, and national laws must be obeyed and appropriate permission must be obtained. But most of the other guidelines apparently will be suspended for lab caches.

 

Since it's a temporary cache, and not listed publicly (you need to share the URL I believe?), it may not follow all the same rules anyway. If you have a picnic in a park that restricts geocaching, would they object to you hiding a cache for your family for the day? Probably not.

 

Lab caches also could be placed inside strip clubs.

 

I'd appreciate a heads up when you hide this lab cache. Thanks.

 

Lab caches will allow someone to hide a cache inside a local butcher shop (with permission). But they apparently also would allow that butcher shop owner to take the names of all geocacher customers who spend at least $25 and then hold a lottery at the end of February to determine which geocacher gets the codeword.

 

From what I've read here, it seems these lab caches are one-time only "hides", and after the first person logs it the cache self destructs or is hidden. I don't think that butcher is really going to get much out of it.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Here is our little spin on the February fun: I ♥ Geocaching Event

 

I like that idea. I had a similar thought with what I want to do, but I chose just to randomly distribute my cache.

 

I like that idea as well. The idea of a "white elephant" gift exchange is a good one. The only real objection that I have to these new lab caches is the notion that the hider chooses who gets to find it. I can why in some cases (e.g. a marriage proposal or a tribute cache for 1000/5000 finds) that choosing the finder might make sense but I'd rather see that promoted as an exception rather than the rule.

 

Although I don't play the FTF game, and don't care for some of the practices associated with it, I could see putting an envelope with the URL for a lab cache in a "real"cache as a nice FTF prize.

 

 

[cezanne]

Hopefully, most geocachers will use some common sense when creating their lab caches. But I can almost guarantee that some geocachers will take advantage of this opportunity to push the limits beyond where Groundspeak would like them to go.

 

Your list of examples what could happen made me realize the only potential advantage of the "one person concept". I have overlooked this before as I only thought in terms of lab caches that deserve to be visited and enjoyed by many. Apparently I'm not thinking negatively enough.

 

Even right now caches can be hidden that seriously violate the guidelines and it will always depend on the finders as well whether such violations become known. If there is only one finder, then there is no need for a later archival anyway.

 

Cezanne

Edited January 28, 2014 by cezanne

[+CanadianRockies]

As I understand it, local, regional, and national laws must be obeyed and appropriate permission must be obtained. But most of the other guidelines apparently will be suspended for lab caches.

Since it's a temporary cache, and not listed publicly (you need to share the URL I believe?), it may not follow all the same rules anyway. If you have a picnic in a park that restricts geocaching, would they object to you hiding a cache for your family for the day? Probably not.

Even a park that allows geocaching might object if you bury a lab cache or screw a board with a codeword into one of their trees. That park might even reconsider their geocaching policy if they learned that Grounspeak was somehow involved in that lab cache.

 

Lab caches will allow someone to hide a cache inside a local butcher shop (with permission). But they apparently also would allow that butcher shop owner to take the names of all geocacher customers who spend at least $25 and then hold a lottery at the end of February to determine which geocacher gets the codeword.

From what I've read here, it seems these lab caches are one-time only "hides", and after the first person logs it the cache self destructs or is hidden. I don't think that butcher is really going to get much out of it.

Only one person can log the lab cache, but the lottery allows the butcher to (potentially) get lots of paying geocacher customers. How many? I suppose that would depend on how many geocachers were in the area and how badly they wanted that Lab Cache icon. Besides, this is only one example of how businesses might "abuse" a lab cache.

[+CanadianRockies]

Hopefully, most geocachers will use some common sense when creating their lab caches. But I can almost guarantee that some geocachers will take advantage of this opportunity to push the limits beyond where Groundspeak would like them to go.

Even right now caches can be hidden that seriously violate the guidelines and it will always depend on the finders as well whether such violations become known. If there is only one finder, then there is no need for a later archival anyway.

Right now, Groundspeak can point to its guidelines and explain to land managers that they forbid buried caches, caches near schools, etc. By promoting nearly unrestricted lab caches, they won't be able to make such a claim if some of those lab caches anger land managers. It could lead to self-inflicted black eyes for the activity.

[cezanne]

Hopefully, most geocachers will use some common sense when creating their lab caches. But I can almost guarantee that some geocachers will take advantage of this opportunity to push the limits beyond where Groundspeak would like them to go.

Even right now caches can be hidden that seriously violate the guidelines and it will always depend on the finders as well whether such violations become known. If there is only one finder, then there is no need for a later archival anyway.

Right now, Groundspeak can point to its guidelines and explain to land managers that they forbid buried caches, caches near schools, etc. By promoting nearly unrestricted lab caches, they won't be able to make such a claim if some of those lab caches anger land managers. It could lead to self-inflicted black eyes for the activity.

 

But I guess that the land managers, schools etc only care about what happens in real life and not about what is written somewhere. So if many cache submissions are like what you listed in your examples, it's a problem anyway whether it happens in a lab cache, a cache submitted to gc.com or a private cache not listed anywhere.

 

I agree with some of your concerns. The point I tried to make is only that the "one person concept" might be an asset in this setting if you think about violations of the type you brought up.

 

 

Cezanne

[+ekhoc]

it can be just a word that is written at the final destination (in the sand on a pretty beach). All local, state, federal laws will apply.

 

Finding sand under the ice and snow on a beach in February in Finland... ..hmm, one could perhaps carve the code word in ice

 

 

[+K13]

I can foresee the following popping up on social media pages...... :Any PM want to trade Lab Cache icons? No work necessary, just send me your code & I will send you my code. BONUS VALUE if you are from a foreign country!"

 

Or if a cacher is more of a Capitalist, listed on the auction sites: "Lab cache code for sale"

 

Is this where our hobby needs to go?

[+cliqS]

While I do see the point of a lab cache being a 1 find only in certain cases, i.e. proposal, birthday present, "the winner takes it all FTF-race"...

 

However, the negatives are stronger IMO:

 

- risk of abuse, i.e. swap codes with your buddy or similar

- the fact that it being a one time only does not invite to creating something out of the ordinary,

- no possibility to enter found it log messages; a big reason why I spend time creating caches is so that I can have the pleasure of reading about subsequent finds...

 

If the 1 find only is an optional thing then that would make lab caches more appealing to create and visit even if they were to have a limited lifetime or somesuch. It could also be a nice extra to an event if multiple cachers could log it, or even be an ad hoc event itself.

 

My 0.02€

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Since it's a temporary cache, and not listed publicly (you need to share the URL I believe?)...

 

Why not? Can't I share it on FB?

[+ChileHead]

Since it's a temporary cache, and not listed publicly (you need to share the URL I believe?)...

 

Why not? Can't I share it on FB?

 

Sure you can. What I meant was that it wasn't listed publicly on geocaching.com ... you have to have the link, you won't likely be able to find a lab cache by a geocaching.com search.

[+fishgeek]

I have a question. Since my Significant Other and I share one account, can I hide a Lab Cache and have her find it? Would that be seen as bad form? I believe that the one-finder limit has something to do with Valentines Day (per the <3 in the name). I plan on hiding something special and giving the link only to my SO, even if I have to create a sock-puppet account using a 30-day trial PM I have laying around.

 

Also, if you don't like Lab Caches, you DO NOT have to hide or find one. As a matter of fact, you can ignore this whole thread.

[+tozainamboku]

Why in the world would a lab cache be a "not chosen" size

Perhaps the better question should be, "Why wouldn't they?". Granted, I'm not a fan of 'not chosen' or 'other', as, locally, those terms mostly translate to 'micro', once the cache is found. But I digress. If I hide a lab cache, should I not have the option of telling the seeker(s) what size container they are hunting, if I opt to use a container?

 

or have difficulty 1/1?

Again, why not? True, if I were to create a lab cache, I'm much more likely to make it a 5/5 than a 1/1, (the world has enough boring P&Gs, in my opinion), and I would hope there would be some way to convey the D/T to whoever hunts it, so they can be prepared.

 

You are wanting to create a statistic for something that doesn't have a value.

If a lab cache truly has no value, why are folks finding them? If they have no value, why are folks excited over the opportunity to hide them? Perhaps you're using 'value' in a different context? If so, I'd suggest your logic is circular. If lab caches were assigned data fields such as size and D/T, and they affected your find count properly, then the statistical value would be present. Would that cause you any harm?

 

When I attended Cacheapalooza, I located four lab caches. My experience in locating them was identical to finding a traditional, (other than the medium providing the coords), in that I went to a specific geographic location, noted by GPS coordinates, then hunted for a container. If I were to describe this behavior to most folks in here, they would likely define it as caching. I know I would. If I am finding caches, should I not get full credit for them?

 

As far as I'm concerned doing that would mess up my stats.

And not counting them, fully, messes up my stats.

 

Sorry, but IMO being OCD about geocaching statistics is a bit silly

Sorry, but telling others what should matter, to them, is a bit silly.

Boy did you misread what I wrote. Currently lab caches do not have sizes or D/T ratings. While they have coordinates, I don't it they have the country or state entered on the page like traditional caches.

 

When someone wants to count lab caches in there stats for container size, or D/T, or even country, I contend you can't do this because the information does not exists. Sure you could reverse geocode the coordinates to get a country/state, bu you must realize this is an expesive operation. Traditional caches depend on the cache owner filling in this data.

 

I really do find it amazing that people are so concerned that everything count the same way in there statistics that they want fake data to be used so that the lab caches will "count".

 

Frankly, I would want my statistics to be accurate, and if the is a special cache type which did not have some data associated with it, I'd want that statistic to not include the special cache type.

 

I sort of understand that people who find lab caches don't want this to mess up their milestones. If the 5000th cache you find is a lab cache it should show as your 5000th cache. But other than that, I really at a lost to why you want the lab cache to count as a 1/1 find or as a unknown container.

 

It has been stated that Groundspeak may decide to create new cache types based on the lab caches, and I am sure that these caches, when created in the regular geocaching database will have the missing fields (with new values perhaps if none of the current values apply). But lab caches don't have these fields and it makes no sense to include statistics on these fields for these caches.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Also, if you don't like Lab Caches, you DO NOT have to hide or find one. As a matter of fact, you can ignore this whole thread.

 

The issue isn't whether or not someone likes or dislikes Lab Caches and ignoring them won't address any problems that they may cause.

 

Consider the following scenario. For existing cache types we're not allowed to damage or deface public or private property. Because these new Lab Caches are being promoted as "anything goes" someone decides to create a Lab Cache for their sweetie by carving the code word into a tree at a nearby park. The park manager finds the carving and discovers that it was associated with the game of geocaching (they're really not going to care the lab cache is an experiment) and decides to adopt a no geocaching policy in that park and for every other town park that they manage. Even though I ignored Lab Caches and didn't try to hide or find any, the entire community is going to pay for that one bad idea.

 

Now, GS can tell us to obey all laws and ordinances, and even tell use not to destroy or deface public or private property but because these new lab caches are self published, any sort of guidelines, requirements, or recommendations are unenforceable. Those that choose to violate those guidelines and say "if you don't like, play the game your own way" may be jeopardizing the game even if they take that COs advice.

Edited January 28, 2014 by NYPaddleCacher

[+SirDonB]

If this is to be a new cache type, I would not mind trying it out to see if it is something I would consider finding in the future. with my time in the military, I am used to being used as a test subject, why should any other aspect of life be different?

 

To each their own, if you dont like the idea, dont do them and the other side of the coin, if you like them do them... if your not sure at least try it once then decide. I view this like the "31 days of caching" last Aug... lots of people complained about it, and lots of people didnt let it affect them.

 

No one from Groundspeak is holding a gun to your head and telling you, you have to participate in their marketing ideas and experiments. It is your choice to cache or not, to hide caches or not, to create a lab cache or not. And as stated in tozainamboku's last post, the missing info that someone may be looking for may be there if lab caches become a perminate part of geocaching.

[+SirDonB]

Also, if you don't like Lab Caches, you DO NOT have to hide or find one. As a matter of fact, you can ignore this whole thread.

 

The issue isn't whether or not someone likes or dislikes Lab Caches and ignoring them won't address any problems that they may cause.

 

Consider the following scenario. For existing cache types we're not allowed to damage or deface public or private property. Because these new Lab Caches are being promoted as "anything goes" someone decides to create a Lab Cache for their sweetie by carving the code word into a tree at a nearby park. The park manager finds the carving and discovers that it was associated with the game of geocaching (they're really not going to care the lab cache is an experiment) and decides to adopt a no geocaching policy in that park and for every other town park that they manage. Even though I ignored Lab Caches and didn't try to hide or find any, the entire community is going to pay for that one bad idea.

 

Now, GS can tell us to obey all laws and ordinances, and even tell use not to destroy or deface public or private property but because these new lab caches are self published, any sort of guidelines, requirements, or recommendations are unenforceable. Those that choose to violate those guidelines and say "if you don't like, play the game your own way" may be jeopardizing the game even if they take that COs advice.

 

yes, I could see this being a very negative unintended product of the process. I would hope that GS has already thought about this and the full master plan will be revieled to us on Feb 3. I know, I for one will adhere to the known guidelines with execption to the saturation limit since we already know that one is not being inforced. But all it takes as NYPaddleCacher said is one joker to mess it up for us all.

[Jayme H]

Lots of good discussion and questions coming up here. Thanks for constructively pointing out things you are excited about and things that you are concerned about. All opinions about the Lab Cache beta test are valid. Let's scale back on the placing of value judgments on personal preferences regarding geocaching. There are many ways to play the game and different people like different aspects of it- it's not good or bad, it is how each of us find enjoyment in the hobby.

 

For general consumption: Keystone and other moderators/reviewers have very good intel on things that get brought up in the forums... it's true, their word is golden. Tone in a typed forum post can be hard to interpret - so let's continue to assume the best about each other's intent (because we are consciously being constructive in our posts) and clarify as needed.

 

Alright... let's talk about stats for a second. Here's complete transparency. The geocaching site currently exists on two systems, an older system and a newer system. Geocaching Labs was built on the new system. The stats live on the older system and aren't available on the new systems. It won't always be this way. We will eventually bring all current geocache listings over onto the new (more efficient) system and integrate everything. This takes time and resources. It would be horrible to rush into that, break something big, and disrupt your upcoming caching adventure. This is why you might hear Moun10Bike or myself letting you know, on other threads, why some functionality on the site isn't as easy to create as it may seem. This is also why you are hearing that the stats may work correctly in the future, but they aren't there yet - it is our hope to make it happen, because we would really like this too. *big breath*

 

I will go back and fish through the discussion to find a few more specific questions/concerns to address. I want everyone to have the answers you are looking for and will do my best to get them to you. I have also noted my possible overuse of the word "cool." I will endeavor to make a conscious effort in finding other words that express my enthusiasm. Cool?

[+funkymunkyzone]

Consider the following scenario. For existing cache types we're not allowed to damage or deface public or private property. Because these new Lab Caches are being promoted as "anything goes" someone decides to create a Lab Cache for their sweetie by carving the code word into a tree at a nearby park. The park manager finds the carving and discovers that it was associated with the game of geocaching (they're really not going to care the lab cache is an experiment) and decides to adopt a no geocaching policy in that park and for every other town park that they manage. Even though I ignored Lab Caches and didn't try to hide or find any, the entire community is going to pay for that one bad idea.

 

I understand and appreciate what you're saying, but I see no difference between this one-off example of carving a code word into a tree, and some miscreant creating a multicache with some information carved into a tree. Just because the latter cache was reviewed isn't going to change it - it's not like they are going to say on the cache page that there is something carved into a tree, so chances are it will get published as the reviewer was oblivious to it. Sure, after it gets found, someone will complain, but the damage is done. No, I reckon, as with ordinary geocaching, you do have to trust people to not be stupid about it.

[cezanne]

I have a question. Since my Significant Other and I share one account, can I hide a Lab Cache and have her find it? Would that be seen as bad form? I believe that the one-finder limit has something to do with Valentines Day (per the <3 in the name). I plan on hiding something special and giving the link only to my SO, even if I have to create a sock-puppet account using a 30-day trial PM I have laying around.

 

I simply do not understand why one needs the gc.com site at all for such purposes. Without the gc.com site everything is easier, more private and more flexible. Is it really about an icon or the +1?

 

The only potential value I could have seen in this experiment with lab caches is to see which ideas come up and which are liked by the community. Private birthday, Valentine etc caches are certainly nothing that are set up with the community in mind. Those will tend to be even more insider like as many public birthday, marriage etc caches that exist already now on the site. Moreover, I can hardly imagine honest feedback in such cases - there will also be a bias involved. If a really good friend is hiding a cache just for me, I actually would be unable to judge the cache idea in a neutral manner.

 

As you have some plan to offer a lab cache to your significant other, I have a question for you. I guess that your idea will be specially adapted to your significant other and you would come up with something completely different if the idea would be to develop a lab cache for a larger group, right?

 

I'm not saying that Valentine presents are bad, but regardless of whether one is a traditionalist or very open to innovations in geocaching I do not think that the community will profit a lot from Valentine presents.

 

It could however that the underlying idea is not really what I understand as experiment, but rather to offer a kind of present to premium members.

As such the concept as it appears from the fragmentary information which is available right now would make more sense to me.

 

 

I somehow cannot help but this lab cache experiment (not lab caches in general) and its naming with the "<3" again reminds me in some way of the "Kiss a frog" fiasco.

 

 

Also, if you don't like Lab Caches, you DO NOT have to hide or find one. As a matter of fact, you can ignore this whole thread.

 

So if someone suggests for example a plan to offer a free bottle of wine to everyone including minors, everyone who does not like that plan should ignore it and shut up instead of being allowed to explain what aspects they do not like?

 

 

Cezanne

Edited January 28, 2014 by cezanne