Place your own Lab Cache!?!?!

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I will go back and fish through the discussion to find a few more specific questions/concerns to address.

 

Something that was eluded to in either the podcast or the gcvlogger video was that a premium member will only be able to hide 1 Lab Cache. Is that true, because I'm sure there are some people thinking about what they might want to do and if they only get one shot we should know that before creating one.

 

 

 

[Jayme H]

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

It was completely wishful thinking on my part. It's currently cloudy and grey in Seattle. You caught me daydreaming and imagining I was finding one on a warm beach, right around sunset. I do like your ice etching idea, though.

[+funkymunkyzone]

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

It was completely wishful thinking on my part. It's currently cloudy and grey in Seattle. You caught me daydreaming and imagining I was finding one on a warm beach, right around sunset. I do like your ice etching idea, though.

 

Even better if it is an etching into a block of ice on a warm beach.... Now that's time limiting the lab cache in style!

[+SirDonB]

I will go back and fish through the discussion to find a few more specific questions/concerns to address.

 

Something that was eluded to in either the podcast or the gcvlogger video was that a premium member will only be able to hide 1 Lab Cache. Is that true, because I'm sure there are some people thinking about what they might want to do and if they only get one shot we should know that before creating one.

 

yes this is a good point, do premium members get only one lab cache to to place? Or can we hide more than one? I think we all understand at this point that there is only one finder for the lab cache and that is looged through a code word entered in at the cache page. And as I understand it, this is only for premium members. Now if you hide one for another cacher and they are not a priemum member, can they still find the cache and log it?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I will go back and fish through the discussion to find a few more specific questions/concerns to address.

 

Something that was eluded to in either the podcast or the gcvlogger video was that a premium member will only be able to hide 1 Lab Cache. Is that true, because I'm sure there are some people thinking about what they might want to do and if they only get one shot we should know that before creating one.

 

yes this is a good point, do premium members get only one lab cache to to place? Or can we hide more than one? I think we all understand at this point that there is only one finder for the lab cache and that is looged through a code word entered in at the cache page. And as I understand it, this is only for premium members. Now if you hide one for another cacher and they are not a priemum member, can they still find the cache and log it?

 

I heard/read a couple of statements that indicted that only a premium member will be able to create one of these February (sorry, I just can bring myself to use the heart emoticon) Lab Caches, but a premium or basic member may find them. One thing I'm hoping for with these caches is that people will create the such only one person can find it (which will be enforced by the platform) but won't dictate who that will be. I just have this thought that these Lab Caches will turn into a popularity contest, with friends creating them for friends, or creators only sharing URLs with the "cool kids".

 

 

[+JoenGPS]

I'm game, sounds interesting, but somewhat elitist being limited to one finder. What about the new cacher? Who's going to hide one for him so he can get the icon (although it does offer up an opportunity to welcome newbies)? And why would someone put a whole lot of effort into hiding a Lab Cache that can only be found once? Great idea for someone proposing, but the way my wife feels about geocaching, I'm afraid she might hide one for me with divorce papers instead of a proposal.

 

Hopefully I have some geo-friends who will hide one for me.

 

Haha.... We found several at the last Geocoinfest... all were great interesting locations. They had a time limit on those which allowed multiple finders. I vote for that. Since your in my neighborhood you may want to watch where we are going. We are in!

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

One thing I'm hoping for with these caches is that people will create the such only one person can find it (which will be enforced by the platform) but won't dictate who that will be. I just have this thought that these Lab Caches will turn into a popularity contest, with friends creating them for friends, or creators only sharing URLs with the "cool kids".

I think the goal here is for the developers to see how creative we can be with a concept. Who finds them is of no importance. What is important is how the results are evaluated.

[+SirDonB]

I heard/read a couple of statements that indicted that only a premium member will be able to create one of these February (sorry, I just can bring myself to use the heart emoticon) Lab Caches, but a premium or basic member may find them. One thing I'm hoping for with these caches is that people will create the such only one person can find it (which will be enforced by the platform) but won't dictate who that will be. I just have this thought that these Lab Caches will turn into a popularity contest, with friends creating them for friends, or creators only sharing URLs with the "cool kids".

 

From my understanding from this thread alone, the lab cache will not be published like other regular caches since they dont go through the same review proccess. You as the creator will publish it, then only you will be able to see it, however, the link you share with someone of your choosing will also be able to see it, unlike sharing the link to an unpublished cache you are working on before you submit it for review. So as I would hope in the spirit of February as you that it would be just out there with no one in particular in mind and the first person to find it gets the find, I see it going more along the "popularity" route as you stated.

[Jayme H]

In preparation for February 3rd and the launch of I <3 Geocaching we have released a new blog post, an official FAQ, and a new Knowledge Book in the Help Center. I will continue to answer questions here while adding additional information to the Knowledge Books as we go along.

 

So excited for my beach cache!

[+CanadianRockies]

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.

One difference is that carving a tree violates the guidelines for a regular cache, so that deters many geocachers from even considering defacing trees. Apparently, there will be no such guideline to deter some lab cache owners who might be inclined to carve trees. They are free to do so, as long as it doesn't break any laws, even if it angers land managers and sours them on geocaching.

 

If the land manager (or someone else) reports the tree carving to a reviewer, a regular cache likely will get archived and its owner will receive an email from the reviewer explaining that defacing trees violates the guidelines. If the cache owner repeatedly violates important guidelines, Groundspeak could revoke the owner's hiding privileges or even ban them from the GS website. If a lab cache involves carving a tree, then it's unclear what actions (if any) Groundspeak would take against the lab cache hider.

 

If the land manager considers adopting a no-geocaching policy because a regular cache involved carving a tree, then Groundspeak could contact them, explain that such behavior violates important Groundspeak guidelines, and the action has been dealt with appropriately. Perhaps this will persuade some land managers not to forbid geocaching. In the case of a lab cache that involved tree carving, then Groundspeak apparently could not say it violates any guideline, and they would be less likely to appease the land manager.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

In preparation for February 3rd and the launch of I <3 Geocaching we have released a new blog post, an official FAQ, and a new Knowledge Book in the Help Center. I will continue to answer questions here while adding additional information to the Knowledge Books as we go along.

 

So excited for my beach cache!

So, if I read the KB correctly, the Lab needs to be created by the end of February. Is there any time constraints on the find?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

In preparation for February 3rd and the launch of I <3 Geocaching we have released a new blog post, an official FAQ, and a new Knowledge Book in the Help Center. I will continue to answer questions here while adding additional information to the Knowledge Books as we go along.

 

So excited for my beach cache!

"I want others to play the geocache I created, how do I share it with them?

I <3 Geocaching is meant for one special person.

 

"

So if nobody creates a Lab Cache for me to find, does that mean that I'm not special? If someone does have a Lab Caches created for them does that make them more special than other geocachers?

 

The complaints about the exclusivity of PMO caches are common and frequent. What do you suppose we'll see in March when a few "special people" got that coveted icon but someone that didn't meet the grade as a chosen one doesn't get the opportunity?

 

 

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Just out of curiosity, will there be a restriction in place that prevents someone from creating a Lab Cache and shares the URL with themselves which they use to find the cache that they created?

[+Manville Possum]

Just out of curiosity, will there be a restriction in place that prevents someone from creating a Lab Cache and shares the URL with themselves which they use to find the cache that they created?

What keeps you from logging your own caches now? I see it all the time with Waymarks.

[+cerberus1]

So if nobody creates a Lab Cache for me to find, does that mean that I'm not special? If someone does have a Lab Caches created for them does that make them more special than other geocachers?

 

The complaints about the exclusivity of PMO caches are common and frequent. What do you suppose we'll see in March when a few "special people" got that coveted icon but someone that didn't meet the grade as a chosen one doesn't get the opportunity?

Yeah. I'm giggling right now, but agree.

 

- like the guy who never got picked in the line at dodge ball and had to go to the team "stuck with him".

- Always ends up at the end of the line and there's never any cake left.

- You know, that guy.

 

Is there a plan for those who'd like to participate, but through no fault of their own (other than being "that" guy) have no one pick him?

[4wheelin_fool]

If the lab cache is intended for just one person, it almost certainly could be placed somewhere requiring illegal access. There would be nobody else but those 2 people who would know. Carve the word on a tree, or spray paint it on a water tower? What would happen? Archive? It's archived anyway.

[+SirDonB]

So if nobody creates a Lab Cache for me to find, does that mean that I'm not special? If someone does have a Lab Caches created for them does that make them more special than other geocachers?

 

The complaints about the exclusivity of PMO caches are common and frequent. What do you suppose we'll see in March when a few "special people" got that coveted icon but someone that didn't meet the grade as a chosen one doesn't get the opportunity?

Yeah. I'm giggling right now, but agree.

 

- like the guy who never got picked in the line at dodge ball and had to go to the team "stuck with him".

- Always ends up at the end of the line and there's never any cake left.

- You know, that guy.

 

Is there a plan for those who'd like to participate, but through no fault of their own (other than being "that" guy) have no one pick him?

 

Although this reminds me of my childhood, and that it tends to carry over into my adult life, I could persuade my kids to make one for me if I really want to feel that special since my kids have thier own accounts. Though that means I would have to upgrade them to PMs.

[+cerberus1]

If I later choose not to participate, can I give my code to my single-parent neighbor (also a PM) with two daughters?

In her eyes, both are special.

 

"I <3 Geocaching is meant for one special person"

Edited January 29, 2014 by cerberus1

[+JesandTodd]

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.

 

 

 

Cezanne

 

Because.

Because I love geocaching and my husband does not. Because my husband knows and accepts this. And because it would be a VERY cool idea if he did this for me. In a form I enjoy dearly.

 

So the question wouldn't be why, but why not?

 

Why not set up special I <3 geocaching cache just for me?

And if he did, why/how does it affect you, way over there?

 

 

"I want others to play the geocache I created, how do I share it with them?

I <3 Geocaching is meant for one special person.

 

"

So if nobody creates a Lab Cache for me to find, does that mean that I'm not special? If someone does have a Lab Caches created for them does that make them more special than other geocachers?

 

The complaints about the exclusivity of PMO caches are common and frequent. What do you suppose we'll see in March when a few "special people" got that coveted icon but someone that didn't meet the grade as a chosen one doesn't get the opportunity?

 

No. Not getting an icon won't mean you aren't special. Maybe it means you didn't assimilate into your geocommunity. Or your community is too small. Or not very creative, or is too big, Or that...blah blah blah.

 

Many people couldn't make it to mega events when lab caches were offered. So THEY didn't get any of the lab icons either. I've found 12 lab caches. I certainly don't feel it's a "coveted icon", exclusive to special people. I thought it was a fun part of a fun day.

(My mini geocaching beer mug, however, is pretty darn cute, exclusive, and coveted. Neener neener neener)

 

I won't get a lab cache for me. That's ok. The world won't end over an icon, and I won't even fault my husband for not making one for me!

[+Murazor]

I think the goal here is for the developers to see how creative we can be with a concept. Who finds them is of no importance. What is important is how the results are evaluated.

 

This is also my impression. The aim seems to be to test the "lab hiding" framework and to look for the creative uses of it.

[+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.

One difference is that carving a tree violates the guidelines for a regular cache, so that deters many geocachers from even considering defacing trees. Apparently, there will be no such guideline to deter some lab cache owners who might be inclined to carve trees. They are free to do so, as long as it doesn't break any laws, even if it angers land managers and sours them on geocaching.

 

If the land manager (or someone else) reports the tree carving to a reviewer, a regular cache likely will get archived and its owner will receive an email from the reviewer explaining that defacing trees violates the guidelines. If the cache owner repeatedly violates important guidelines, Groundspeak could revoke the owner's hiding privileges or even ban them from the GS website. If a lab cache involves carving a tree, then it's unclear what actions (if any) Groundspeak would take against the lab cache hider.

 

If the land manager considers adopting a no-geocaching policy because a regular cache involved carving a tree, then Groundspeak could contact them, explain that such behavior violates important Groundspeak guidelines, and the action has been dealt with appropriately. Perhaps this will persuade some land managers not to forbid geocaching. In the case of a lab cache that involved tree carving, then Groundspeak apparently could not say it violates any guideline, and they would be less likely to appease the land manager.

 

You kind of cut off my example that puts that into context. I feel that common sense comes into play.

 

Continue to follow all laws, local regulations and just common sense when placing your personal geocache.

 

Carving something into a tree is wrong whether it's for a lab cache or any other kind of cache - it's vandalism that probably breaks a law or regulation, and it's certainly against common sense when it comes to geocaching, so yeah I think it's covered.

[+GEO-BREIN]

First of all I'm also exited to place and find my first Lab Cache. But I know the concept already. This is the same thing as Intercaching that's already alive in the geocache community. An intercache is a (multi) cache adventure where you have to find clues and insert certain codewords to get to the final. This Lab Cache is the same thing. But still ... it is a good thing that GS implements this in our hobby but the global idea isn't theirs though.

We have to wait 'till the 3th of Februari to know if it's the same thing, but I have a feeling it is.

[cezanne]

Because I love geocaching and my husband does not. Because my husband knows and accepts this. And because it would be a VERY cool idea if he did this for me. In a form I enjoy dearly.

 

So the question wouldn't be why, but why not?

 

Why not set up special I <3 geocaching cache just for me?

And if he did, why/how does it affect you, way over there?

 

It does not affect me and I do not mind if your husband sets up a lab cache for you.

I do not want to take any potential source of happyness away from you or someone else.

I just thought that such caches could be set up as private cache much more easily outside of gc.com.

 

Offering something new for a larger group of persons one has not preselected seems something more interesting to me for a site like gc.com when they

are interested into seeing what kind of ideas people come up with.

 

Special presents for spouses, children, parents, beloved people etc are certainly nice, but I think they are easily implementable outside of geocaching.com while this is

not the case for experimenting with ideas outside of the current guidelines that are directed to a larger and not preselected audience.

Was I clearer this time?

 

 

Cezanne

Edited January 29, 2014 by cezanne

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Just out of curiosity, will there be a restriction in place that prevents someone from creating a Lab Cache and shares the URL with themselves which they use to find the cache that they created?

What keeps you from logging your own caches now? I see it all the time with Waymarks.

 

I'm not familiar with Waymarking enough to know how logging works, but for a geocache, one can easily look at the cache owner and the logs to see that someone has found their own cache. If Lab Caches don't have logs, how could you tell if someone found a lab cache that they created.

 

I'm not suggesting that I would do it, or condone the practice but one of the big complaints about challenges was that bogus completions could not be deleted.

[+Murazor]

What keeps you from logging your own caches now?

 

Entering the completion code from the owner's account will be considered as testing and it won't count as a find.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

So if nobody creates a Lab Cache for me to find, does that mean that I'm not special? If someone does have a Lab Caches created for them does that make them more special than other geocachers?

 

The complaints about the exclusivity of PMO caches are common and frequent. What do you suppose we'll see in March when a few "special people" got that coveted icon but someone that didn't meet the grade as a chosen one doesn't get the opportunity?

Yeah. I'm giggling right now, but agree.

 

- like the guy who never got picked in the line at dodge ball and had to go to the team "stuck with him".

- Always ends up at the end of the line and there's never any cake left.

- You know, that guy.

 

Is there a plan for those who'd like to participate, but through no fault of their own (other than being "that" guy) have no one pick him?

 

I am not really suggesting that there be plan for allowing someone to participate (as a finder) but just that the notion of choosing who gets to participate could alienate some new cachers or the more casual player that doesn't attend every local event and is on everyone's PAF list.

 

When growing up I often *was* "that guy" only because I was really small. I was the second shortest kid in my high school (with 1600 students). The second shortest was my brother. I was often picked last for pick up sporting games until people started to find out that I was or scrappy and athletic than I looked.

[cezanne]

This is the same thing as Intercaching that's already alive in the geocache community.

 

It does not seem to be the same as according to my understanding intercaches require smartphones while lab caches do not necessarily. That makes a big difference.

 

Cezanne

[+NYPaddleCacher]

If the lab cache is intended for just one person, it almost certainly could be placed somewhere requiring illegal access. There would be nobody else but those 2 people who would know. Carve the word on a tree, or spray paint it on a water tower? What would happen? Archive? It's archived anyway.

 

If someone that was inclined to carve a word on a tree or spray paint it on water tower knew it was going to be archived any way they might see it as there are no repercussions for doing so. Presumably, the creator of a normal cache wants their cached to be published and not be subsequently archived so to avoid having that happen they're probably not going to hide it by digging a hole in a city park. In that context, the threat of archival might be seen as a deterrent. If a lab cache is going to be archived no matter how it's created there's no deterrent.

 

Is it just a coincidence that the lab cache promotion is scheduled for February and the Geocaching CITO 2014 promotion scheduled in April?

 

As part of the information we'll get on February 3rd it should probably include something like: "once you find the cache and get the code word, you should remove all evidence of the cache".

 

 

[+Team Microdot]

As part of the information we'll get on February 3rd it should probably include something like: "once you find the cache and get the code word, you should remove all evidence of the cache".

 

Surely that's already covered by thou shalt obey all local/city/state laws - given that littering contravenes local law in most places?

[cezanne]

I think the goal here is for the developers to see how creative we can be with a concept. Who finds them is of no importance. What is important is how the results are evaluated.

 

This is also my impression. The aim seems to be to test the "lab hiding" framework and to look for the creative uses of it.

 

I agree only to some extent. While I also think that the focus is on the "hiding part" and not on the "finding part", I do not think that the February experiment will lead to results of the type mentioned above.

 

The more I read about the project the more I wonder whether apart from simply offering a present to PMs another key aspect behind this experiment was the thought that one might try to see how successful the idea of offering one day caches possibly but not necessarily directed to special people (whether a single person or a group) could become as commercial object (i.e. on a charge per cache basis). I'm convinced that such restricted special day presents for a particular geocacher could provide a new and valuable source of revenue for Groundspeak.

I would not object against such an offer even though I would personally not make use of it.

At this point of course what I write above is just my personal speculation. It might well be that noone at Groundspeak ever thought about selling something like birthday caches.

 

In any case all the examples provided in the material which is available up to now point into the direction of private caches that one never would set up in this manner for a general audience. There is nothing bad per se in the February experiment. I just do not buy the arguments that the background behind the experiment is to learn more about what creative ideas outside of the current guidelines cachers might come up with from which the community at large can profit. The term evaluation does not make sense for me in this context. Honestly, who does evaluate the birthday present one gets from a beloved person if it is evident that a lot of effort went into the present?

 

 

Cezanne

Edited January 29, 2014 by cezanne

[+palmetto]

Re logging your own Lab Cache, I honestly don't know - but the language in the Logging Article suggests it may not be possible.

 

"Once the correct find code has been entered by another geocacher it is automatically archived."

 

Bold emphasis added by me. I'm thinking that this may mean that you can enter the codeword as a test, without altering the page. Which means without triggering a find or archiving the listing. I could be wrong.

 

Hi NYPaddleCacher, re not being invited. Yep, it could gonna happen. If you don't know another local geocacher who might create something for you, you're probably out of luck. The hazards of being geographically isolated.

 

The existing Lab Caches have been loggable by Basic members, I assume these will be as well.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Two questions:

 

1) Will others be able to see a given lab cache after the intended person logs it? i.e. If I go to a person's profile and I see that they hid/found a I <3 lab cache, will I be able to see what they put together?

 

2) Does the finder have to enter the codeword into the web page from the specified location? Or can they do it from home (for instance they do not have a web enabled phone)?

 

[edit: typos]

Edited January 29, 2014 by BBWolf+3Pigs

[+ChileHead]

This is the same thing as Intercaching that's already alive in the geocache community.

 

It does not seem to be the same as according to my understanding intercaches require smartphones while lab caches do not necessarily. That makes a big difference.

 

Cezanne

 

It's like a one stage intercache in some ways. You can make an intercache that doesn't require a smart phone if you aren't enforcing coordinates.

[cezanne]

It's like a one stage intercache in some ways. You can make an intercache that doesn't require a smart phone if you aren't enforcing coordinates.

 

The intercache web page talked about supported devices and mentioned only smartphones. I tried to look at the some intercaches in the web and I could not get any impression at all as I could not find an intercache where the description of the cache hunt was available and not only a few sentences about what to expect.

 

I did not understand the lab cache concept as restricted to one stage however. It could involve many stages.

Moreover, I very much hope that the descriptions of the lab caches can be normal html texts (the sharing of URLs seems to point into that direction) and that one does not need a phone to obtain the tasks.

 

 

Cezanne

[+palmetto]

Two questions:

 

1) Will others be able to see a given lab cache after the intended person logs it? i.e. If I go to a person's profile and I see that they hid/found a I <3 lab cache, will I be able to see what they put together?

 

2) Does the finder have to enter the codeword into the web page from the specified location? Or can they do it from home (for instance they do not have a web enabled phone)?

 

 

1) Will the specific lab cache will remain visible from a user's profile? My guess is that it will NOT. Take a look at the Isonzo Karst profile. If you click the Lab caches link, you'll see a general page about Lab Caches; you will not see individual caches. Seeing a Lab Cache page requires the unique URL of that cache.

I have the links for some that I did not log, there I see "This adventure is either expired or has already been played." (Isonzo Karst can see the individual lab cache pages that Isonzo Karst has logged).

 

It will NOT show as "hid 1 Lab Cache". No stats attach to a Lab Cache beyond smiley count increment 1, and that includes no hider stats.

 

2) Codeword can be entered from any place.

Edited January 29, 2014 by palmetto

[Clan Riffster]

Frankly, I would want my statistics to be accurate

That may be the gist of the complaints from those who want these to count toward all the listed statistics. Simple accuracy. Given my situation, whilst at Cacheapalooza, I "found" four containers at given sets of GPS coordinates. From that perspective, it certainly sounds like I found geocaches. The only thing missing was a physical logbook. Well, that and container size, D/T rating, etc. With just a few rodent clicks, Groundspeak could include these fields into their experiment, and the stats would be in line with our findings.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Two questions:

 

1) Will others be able to see a given lab cache after the intended person logs it? i.e. If I go to a person's profile and I see that they hid/found a I <3 lab cache, will I be able to see what they put together?

 

2) Does the finder have to enter the codeword into the web page from the specified location? Or can they do it from home (for instance they do not have a web enabled phone)?

 

 

1) Will the specific lab cache will remain visible from a user's profile? My guess is that it will NOT. Take a look at the Isonzo Karst profile. If you click the Lab caches link, you'll see a general page about Lab Caches; you will not see individual caches. Seeing a Lab Cache page requires the unique URL of that cache.

I have the links for some that I did not log, there I see "This adventure is either expired or has already been played." (Isonzo Karst can see the individual lab cache pages that Isonzo Karst has logged).

 

It will NOT show as "hid 1 Lab Cache". No stats attach to a Lab Cache beyond smiley count increment 1, and that includes no hider stats.

 

2) Codeword can be entered from any place.

 

re:

 

1) That's too bad. It would be great to see what "adventures" (or lack of adventures) people came up during this experiment.

 

2) So if I wanted, I could swap URLs and codewords with my buddy, not actually go anywhere, and get the Icon? I wonder what percentage of the lab caches will wind up going this route.

[+CanadianRockies]

Carving something into a tree is wrong whether it's for a lab cache or any other kind of cache - it's vandalism that probably breaks a law or regulation, and it's certainly against common sense when it comes to geocaching, so yeah I think it's covered.

There's a reason why Groundspeak's hiding guidelines are spelled out rather than are in the form of a simple sentence: "Use common sense when hiding a cache." Common sense means different things to different people, and some people have more common sense than others. Most of us wouldn't carve a tree, but plenty of people do.

 

What does common sense say about nailing a codeword sign to a big tree? Many people don't think that causes any significant harm and note that many land managers do precisely that (e.g., cross-country ski trail signs). But many other land managers (and even some of the same land managers) would be upset if a geocacher pounded a nail into a tree.

 

What does common sense say about burying a lab cache container? Many people feel there are plenty of locations where that is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. Some land managers even allow people with metal detectors to dig on their property. But many land managers also would be upset if a lab cache was buried on their property. So upset that they might forbid all geocaching on their land.

 

What does common sense say about hiding a lab cache container in an ancient British dry wall? Not everyone realizes the kind of destruction this can potentially cause.

 

What does common sense say about hiding a lab cache container in a cemetery? Not everyone has the same sensitivities when it comes to burial places.

 

What does common sense say about hiding a lab cache container near a dam? Not everyone realizes that dams could be considered terrorist targets and suspicious packages placed near them could attract the attention of local authorities.

 

What does common sense say about hiding a lab cache container in a public park? Some parks allow geocaching. Others don't. Still others require special permission. Most reviewers know which is which. Many geocachers don't.

 

As I noted yesterday, I certainly hope geocachers will use common sense when creating their lab caches. But I don't think that will prevent the creation of problematic lab caches. When you encourage people to experiment and remove many restrictions, then you shouldn't be surprised if some of them go in directions you didn't anticipate.

[cezanne]

 

As I noted yesterday, I certainly hope geocachers will use common sense when creating their lab caches. But I don't think that will prevent the creation of problematic lab caches. When you encourage people to experiment and remove many restrictions, then you shouldn't be surprised if some of them go in directions you didn't anticipate.

 

I agree, but what I tried to explain somewhere before is that these guidelines (no buried caches, no nails in trees etc) are broken often also for conventional geocaches. Sometimes the violation is reported and the cache gets archived, something nothing happens at all. Many cache hiders do not read the guidelines or do not care about them.

 

If land managers/property owners etc come across nails in trees e.g. or buried caches, it will not make an essential difference to them whether the conflicting cache is a lab cache, a conventional lab cache or a cache listed somewhere else.

 

I guess that those who understand that nails in tree are an issue, will not use them in lab caches and those who do not understand this will not be kept from using them wherever they wish to do so (lab cache or not).

 

By the way: I would not worry too much about terrorist targets, cemeteries etc as at those locations typically the issue comes from several visits and/or containers that stay there for a longer time. In case of these one day constructions if a container is placed at all it would make sense that the finder and or the hider take away the traces of the cache quickly after the find anyway.

 

I have heard numerous stories about private birthday caches where a container containing presents like tickets, voucers etc was hidden and these containers were of course removed after the found. This lab cache experiment to me seems something like private caches that show up on the finder's gc.com account and nothing more, but I might be wrong.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited January 29, 2014 by cezanne

[+DanOCan]

2) So if I wanted, I could swap URLs and codewords with my buddy, not actually go anywhere, and get the Icon? I wonder what percentage of the lab caches will wind up going this route.

My guess will be quite a lot. If the evolution of caching has taught us anything, it is that people will always take the path of least resistance if there is an opportunity to increment their smiley count.

[+CanadianRockies]

If land managers/property owners etc come across nails in trees e.g. or buried caches, it will not make an essential difference to them whether the conflicting cache is a lab cache, a conventional lab cache or a cache listed somewhere else.

For some land managers, I agree it won't make much difference.

 

But other land managers have some common sense. They realize there's a difference between an activity that has (somewhat) enforceable guidelines and an activity where almost anything goes. For them, it matters that buried caches and nails in trees are against the guidelines, that such caches will be archived, that such hiders will be warned, and that repeat offenders will be banned.

 

I speak from experience. In my city, a park employee found a board with writing on it screwed into a tree. They associated this with geocaching and announced they were going to strictly enforce their tree protection bylaw with regards to geocaching. (This bylaw even forbids hanging objects from city-owned trees.)

 

Members of our geocaching community worked with city officials and assured them that harming any trees violated Groundspeak guidelines, explained how to contact Groundspeak to get harmful caches archived, worked with our local reviewer to prohibit the placement of caches in especially sensitive areas, and had a park representative speak at one of my events to educate geocachers on the proper placement of caches on park property.

 

Some land managers actually want their parks to be enjoyed -- in a responsible way.

Edited January 29, 2014 by CanadianRockies

[4wheelin_fool]

Carving something into a tree is wrong whether it's for a lab cache or any other kind of cache - it's vandalism that probably breaks a law or regulation, and it's certainly against common sense when it comes to geocaching, so yeah I think it's covered.

There's a reason why Groundspeak's hiding guidelines are spelled out rather than are in the form of a simple sentence: "Use common sense when hiding a cache." Common sense means different things to different people, and some people have more common sense than others. Most of us wouldn't carve a tree, but plenty of people do.

 

What does common sense say about nailing a codeword sign to a big tree? Many people don't think that causes any significant harm and note that many land managers do precisely that (e.g., cross-country ski trail signs). But many other land managers (and even some of the same land managers) would be upset if a geocacher pounded a nail into a tree.

 

What does common sense say about burying a lab cache container? Many people feel there are plenty of locations where that is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. Some land managers even allow people with metal detectors to dig on their property. But many land managers also would be upset if a lab cache was buried on their property. So upset that they might forbid all geocaching on their land.

 

What does common sense say about hiding a lab cache container in an ancient British dry wall? Not everyone realizes the kind of destruction this can potentially cause.

 

What does common sense say about hiding a lab cache container in a cemetery? Not everyone has the same sensitivities when it comes to burial places.

 

What does common sense say about hiding a lab cache container near a dam? Not everyone realizes that dams could be considered terrorist targets and suspicious packages placed near them could attract the attention of local authorities.

 

What does common sense say about hiding a lab cache container in a public park? Some parks allow geocaching. Others don't. Still others require special permission. Most reviewers know which is which. Many geocachers don't.

 

As I noted yesterday, I certainly hope geocachers will use common sense when creating their lab caches. But I don't think that will prevent the creation of problematic lab caches. When you encourage people to experiment and remove many restrictions, then you shouldn't be surprised if some of them go in directions you didn't anticipate.

 

With only one person being the recipient, the chances are much higher that it could be placed in an illegal area, or use graffiti or defacement of some sort. Common sense says that the one person likely could be trusted not to report it.

[+K13]

GS expects Premium Members to create some elaborate cache experience for only ONE finder? Then wants to use their surveys of the hider and finder to determine whether this is a viable new caching experience? To me, this seems to produce a very skewed data set.

As a hider, many will not do the work to make an over the top experience for only one finder.

As a finder, the feeling of being that 'one special person' chosen as the exclusive finder will have an overly gracious review of the find.

[+CanadianRockies]

With only one person being the recipient, the chances are much higher that it could be placed in an illegal area, or use graffiti or defacement of some sort. Common sense says that the one person likely could be trusted not to report it.

Many land managers are familiar with Groundspeak's website and even have accounts. If I was such a land manager and learned that lab caches were going to be created without being reviewed and without being restricted by most of Groundspeak's guidelines, then I might have second thoughts about allowing any geocaching to occur on my land. It might not matter to me whether I learned about an actual defacement.

 

As reviewers have noted in these forums, one of the advantages they have in dealing with land managers is that they can assure these managers that buried caches are not allowed and will be archived if reported. Groundspeak will now lose some of that high ground. In the future, if they are honest, reviewers will be able to say only that Groundspeak doesn't allow regular caches to be buried; experimental, temporary caches were allowed to be buried.

Edited January 29, 2014 by CanadianRockies

[+DanOCan]

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.

This is encouraging and makes me feel more inclined to participate. It's amazing how far a simple explanation goes.

 

Now to try and come up with some ideas as to how to participate...

[+6NoisyHikers]

Thank you, Jayme, for your endless enthusiasm and unbelievable patience.

 

I'm thinking my Lab Cache will be a day-long multi that ends with an outdoor concert where the lead singer shouts out the code during the drum solo.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

As I noted yesterday, I certainly hope geocachers will use common sense when creating their lab caches. But I don't think that will prevent the creation of problematic lab caches. When you encourage people to experiment and remove many restrictions, then you shouldn't be surprised if some of them go in directions you didn't anticipate.

 

I agree, but what I tried to explain somewhere before is that these guidelines (no buried caches, no nails in trees etc) are broken often also for conventional geocaches. Sometimes the violation is reported and the cache gets archived, something nothing happens at all. Many cache hiders do not read the guidelines or do not care about them.

 

All true, but it doesn't really address the potential problem. The fact that others have been able to get away with burying caches or putting nails in trees doesn't make it acceptable. If a problem exists (burying caches) adding to the problem certainly doesn't help.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

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.

This is encouraging and makes me feel more inclined to participate. It's amazing how far a simple explanation goes.

 

Now to try and come up with some ideas as to how to participate...

 

Here's an idea. Moving cache are no longer allowed, right? But you could create one with a Lab Cache.

 

Suppose I create a Lab Cache and place a container which includes a piece of paper with the code word on it and post the URL on a local geocaching club web site. On the lab cache page I indicate that the finder should take the container, create a new Lab cache with a new code word and hide it somewhere else and post the new URL on the club web site. Now, the URL would change each time, but the container (and anything that was put inside it) would stay the same and move from location to location.

 

 

[+SwineFlew]

I noticed this for a while, I seem to smell a lot of fear of any new cache type will/would/might shake up the leaderboard. Some cachers seem to hate any changes that might give any cachers with lower finds to jump over them in a hurry.

[+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.

 

I simply do not understand why one needs the gc.com site at all for such purposes.

 

Cezanne

 

Because.

 

Because I love geocaching and my husband does not. Because my husband knows and accepts this. And because it would be a VERY cool idea if he did this for me. In a form I enjoy dearly.

 

So the question wouldn't be why, but why not?

 

Why not set up special I <3 geocaching cache just for me?

And if he did, why/how does it affect you, way over there?

 

 

Jes, thank you. You said that much more coherently than I would have.

 

The only two arguments against Lab Caches that I hear here are the effect on statistics and the "Wild, Wild West" scenarios. They are only relaxing a few of the GEOCACHING rules (mainly proximity and longevity), not saying that anything goes. The extrapolations of caching behavior that I've seen on this thread are amazing. As far as statistics go, mine are already off by 5 and it does not bother me much. Being off by 6 will not bother me any more. Again, no one is making you participate.