You can't log this cache until you did 'X'

[+tozainamboku]

Seems signing the log is an ALR.

In a way it is. However Groundspeak has always encouraged cachers to write in the physical logbook when they find a cache and has allowed the names in the physical log to be used by both sides in disputes over whether an online log is bogus.

 

You are told to always sign the physical log when you find the cache. The theory is that you can not sign the physical log unless you find he cache. Signing the physical log is sufficient to show you found the cache. But you can find the cache and not necessarily sign the log.

 

The online log is called a "found it" log not the "You can't log this cache [online] until you have signed the physical log" log. Groundspeak has determined that cache owners may delete online logs in certain situations and among these are failure to have signed the physical log and failure to provide proof of your accomplishment in a challenge cache.

[+Roman!]

Does it really need to be all that confusing?

[+GeoBain]

Does it really need to be all that confusing?

 

It's not confusing. If you want to be guaranteed a find that will be upheld by Groundspeak, sign the log and fullfill the requirements of the challenge.

[+dprovan]

Does it really need to be all that confusing?

No, it doesn't need to be confusing, but at the same time we want to be flexible in case everyone involved is OK with things like replacing lost containers on power trails.

[+Roman!]

Does it really need to be all that confusing?

No, it doesn't need to be confusing, but at the same time we want to be flexible in case everyone involved is OK with things like replacing lost containers on power trails.

 

Things have rules, I know geocaching never will as it's too late, rules need to be established in the beginning.

 

Rule: no siggy, no smiley, if someone forgot thier pen and found a wet, pulpy mess of a log and they cant get the log out of the container they could still find a way to leave their mark on their log.

 

Rule: no throwdowns unless specifically permitted on the cache page by the CO, they could even create a throwdown attribute or have a PT attribute and only then are throwdowns accepted.

 

By having so much inconsistency in rules that really aren't rules you see the problems like virtual traditionals, throwdowns, photo logging, selfies on webcam, etc.

 

I guess the real problem is you have an activity that's all about the numbers but no one wants to admit it.

Edited September 27, 2014 by Roman!

[cezanne]

 

In some ways they are worse than regular ALRs. At least taking a photo or wearing a funny hat was fun.

 

It depends on for whom. For me taking a photo of myself or wearing a hat is no fun while for example going for lonesome mountain caches is fun. It's quite subjective and everyone could choose those ALRs that are fun to him/her.

[+TopShelfRob]

I saw a comment way back in this thread that is the most sensible yet -- have two separate counts... A "finds" (smileys) count and a "visits" count. If you find a challenge you didn't qualify to "find" you could "visit" it. And then have a choice in the profile as to which number displays for you sitewide. You could choose "finds" "visits" or "display none".

 

Then whichever camp you're in, there's something for you:

 

- The "I hate challenges" camp -- your "visits" is your score

- The "I love challenges" camp -- your "finds" is your score

- The "It's not a numbers game" camp -- display no score

 

Of course that would entail totally revamping some things that would probably not be do-able, but hey, it's as good a suggestion as any other.

[+tozainamboku]

I guess the real problem is you have an activity that's all about the numbers but no one wants to admit it.

For most people geocaching isn't about the numbers. People aren't competing for prizes. Sure you can "win" a souvenir on your profiles page or get you can watch the caches change on the map from shoe boxes, question marks, and ghosts into smileys. But people who are competing with others are deluding themselves. There are no rules - so competing against someone who has a different definition of a find is as foolish as wearing ill-fitining knickers that get twisted all the time. (However it makes the forums entertaining )

[+Roman!]

I guess the real problem is you have an activity that's all about the numbers but no one wants to admit it.

For most people geocaching isn't about the numbers. People aren't competing for prizes. Sure you can "win" a souvenir on your profiles page or get you can watch the caches change on the map from shoe boxes, question marks, and ghosts into smileys. But people who are competing with others are deluding themselves. There are no rules - so competing against someone who has a different definition of a find is as foolish as wearing ill-fitining knickers that get twisted all the time. (However it makes the forums entertaining )

 

Thanks for proving my point, it is about the numbers and hard, fast rules would settle the definition and define the competition.

Edited September 27, 2014 by Roman!

[+niraD]

It's pretty obvious that the real objection to challenge caches is that they make clearing out a radius (or other similar goals) more difficult for the OCD among us, only nobody wants to admit that so they make up other justifications.

I guess my objections aren't real objections then. I just think achievements like maintaining a streak or filling a grid or spelling out the alphabet make more sense as some separate system (online badges, physical medalions, whatever), rather than as a precondition for logging a find online. But the system we have now uses preconditions for logging finds online. So I've completed some challenge caches, I'm working on a couple others, and I've got several others on my ignore list. And when the topic comes up in the forums, I sometimes mention that I'd prefer a system other than the preconditions for logging finds online.

 

 

Things have rules, I know geocaching never will as it's too late, rules need to be established in the beginning.

Yeah, because the rules guidelines for geocaching have never changed since the beginning. And the rules for other activities (like football, or basketball, or hockey, or chess) have never changed since the beginning either.

[+Roman!]

It's pretty obvious that the real objection to challenge caches is that they make clearing out a radius (or other similar goals) more difficult for the OCD among us, only nobody wants to admit that so they make up other justifications.

I guess my objections aren't real objections then. I just think achievements like maintaining a streak or filling a grid or spelling out the alphabet make more sense as some separate system (online badges, physical medalions, whatever), rather than as a precondition for logging a find online. But the system we have now uses preconditions for logging finds online. So I've completed some challenge caches, I'm working on a couple others, and I've got several others on my ignore list. And when the topic comes up in the forums, I sometimes mention that I'd prefer a system other than the preconditions for logging finds online.

 

 

Things have rules, I know geocaching never will as it's too late, rules need to be established in the beginning.

Yeah, because the rules guidelines for geocaching have never changed since the beginning. And the rules for other activities (like football, or basketball, or hockey, or chess) have never changed since the beginning either.

 

Actually they have, rules in sports are always changing as the times chane.

 

Sports and games don't have guidelines.

Edited September 27, 2014 by Roman!

[+tozainamboku]

Sports and games don't have guidelines.

I'm not so sure. There are a lot of guidelines being proposed to deal with head injury in high school and youth football. May some of these are getting adopted as rules by the governing bodies. But in many cases these are just guidelines for parents and coaches to follow. The referees have no power to enforce these and schools are not sanctioned for not following the guidelines.

 

In spite of what some people believe there is no governing body for geocaching. Gecaching.com is just one listing service, albeit by far the biggest. Geocaching.com has rules and guidelines for listing geocaches on their site. In order to explain geocaching, they provide some suggestion for how the game is played, but they are careful to not to dictate to players how to play.

 

They provide an online logging system. For many years they didn't even mention online logging in the "rules" they posted in the FAQ to explain geocaching. Even when they changed these, the statement they used is "Log your experience at Geocaching.com".

 

The online logging of caches at geocaching are IMO still an entirely optional component, despite what the "rules" say. But the rules for using this component are simple - Log your experience at Geocaching.com. Groundspeak will never create the type of rules you want to define what a find is. Such rules would be unenforceable in any case, so why bother. They have provided guidance to cache owners to maintain the quality of post made on their cache pages and have guidelines for logging that players and cache owners can use to work out disputes over find logs.

[+niraD]

Sports and games don't have guidelines.

I'm not so sure. There are a lot of guidelines being proposed to deal with head injury in high school and youth football. May some of these are getting adopted as rules by the governing bodies. But in many cases these are just guidelines for parents and coaches to follow. The referees have no power to enforce these and schools are not sanctioned for not following the guidelines.

My thoughts exactly. It has been decades since I played (American) football in school, but I had coaches who taught me proper techniques, not because the rules required those techniques, but because they were safer (for me, for my teammates, and for our opponents). And hockey has "enforcers", who are there not to enforce rules, but to enforce a sort of "gentleman's agreement" about what play styles are acceptable. And so on...

 

Not everything is codified in the rules.

[+sbell111]

Things have rules, I know geocaching never will as it's too late, rules need to be established in the beginning.

Yeah, because the rules guidelines for geocaching have never changed since the beginning. And the rules for other activities (like football, or basketball, or hockey, or chess) have never changed since the beginning either.

Actually they have, rules in sports are always changing as the times chane.

 

Sports and games don't have guidelines.

Sarcasm can be hard to spot sometimes. niraD's point is that just as the rules of those various sports have developed over the years, so has our game's guidelines. Of course, this doesn't change the fact that the guidelines deal with issues related to listing a cache online and managing that online listing and have basically no bearing on searching for caches, but whatever.

[+redsox_mark]

I must admit I have some trouble following all the twists and turns of this thread. But I wanted to share some simple thoughts.

 

I geocache because I like it. It provides me with pleasure. If I try to explain to a muggle why this is, I generally get strange looks.

 

Putting aside events and other special cases; - physical Geocaches are either:

 

1. Caches which you can just go out and find (Traditionals, and straightforward multis).

2. Caches which require an additional step. (Mainly caches with the "?" icon). Something that needs to be done in addition to the searching in the field.

 

For the second case - the "?" caches - there are 3 main sub-types.

 

A. "Standard Puzzle": Solve a puzzle to get the coordinates.

B. "Bonus Cache": Find specific caches and collect clues to get the coordinates.

C. "Challenge Cache": Complete the defined Geocaching related task before claiming "Found it"

 

At a basic level, I don't see a Challenge cache being that MUCH different from the other 2 sub-types. Yes there are differences of course (and I'm not opposed to Challenges having their own icon). But when I look at a "?" icon on the map, I expect that I can't just run out and find it. I have* to DO SOMETHING first. For "Standard Puzzle", I have* to solve it. For "Bonus Cache" I have* to find the other caches. For the Challenge Cache, I have to meet the criteria before I can complete it.

 

"Completion" means logging a Found It log. That is the way we mark a cache as completed.

 

*have: I understand that with Standard Puzzle or Bonus Cache I don't strictly HAVE to solve it. I can have a friend give me the answer.. I can find it accidently, etc. But for me these things generally don't happen.

 

Now there have been a lot of good ideas about challenge caches could be changed with different log types etc, but frankly I don't see the need. You complete the 2 parts (the challenge qualification and finding the physical cache), and you claim a find.

 

"What about those who don't like challenge caches" I hear you say? Well, to me it is similar to those that don't like standard puzzle caches. Just don't do them. These caches are still a minority; there are plenty of other caches out there to find.

 

Now.. after all that.. the main thing I wanted to say is this. Challenge caches add to my fun/pleasure. As do standard puzzle caches. Assuming the physical stage is equal - with a standard puzzle cache, I get "fun" when I have solved the puzzle, and "fun" when I find the physical box. And the fun of the physical box itself is greater to me, because of the puzzle.

 

Same with Challenges, and even more so. The other day I targeted a traditional cache as it helped me towards qualification for a Challenge Cache. The fact that it helped me with the challenge made that traditional cache more fun for me. When I eventually qualify for the Challenge Cache, that will be fun - I will have a pleasurable feeling from that. And finally I will find the physical cache for the Challenge Cache I've been working on - that will bring me more pleasure than if it was just a Traditional Cache.

[+niraD]

"What about those who don't like challenge caches" I hear you say? Well, to me it is similar to those that don't like standard puzzle caches. Just don't do them. These caches are still a minority; there are plenty of other caches out there to find.

It isn't just about those who don't like challenge caches, and who are trying to avoid them. Some people like challenge caches, but find it difficult to identify them because they're bundled in with all the other mystery/puzzle caches that they don't like. And some people like challenge caches and other mystery/puzzle caches, but want a way to view them separately, because there's a perceived difference in the way they work, and therefore these people approach them differently.

 

Personally, I think challenge caches have outgrown the "staging ground" of the mystery/puzzle cache type, and are ready for their own cache type. But Groundspeak hasn't put me in charge of that decision... yet.

[+redsox_mark]

 

Personally, I think challenge caches have outgrown the "staging ground" of the mystery/puzzle cache type, and are ready for their own cache type. But Groundspeak hasn't put me in charge of that decision... yet.

 

I agree a separate cache type is a good idea. Not only for searching, but because they have their own specific rules/guidelines.

 

I'm less convinced about breaking the link with physical caches; awarding badges etc (which have been suggested in this thread).

[+#Tenzin]

I was thinking about the problem.

 

What if I log the cache online, and in the same log I drop a TB in the cache.

Then the owner of the cache can't delete that log right?

Edited October 3, 2014 by #Tenzin

[cezanne]

What if I log the cache online, and in the same log I drop a TB in the cache.

Then the owner of the cache can't delete that log right?

 

First, the owner can delete every log. Whether it is legitimate is a different question.

Second, the trackable logs do not get deleted if a cache log is deleted.

Third, what is the problem with logging a note if you do not qualify for a challenge cache?

 

Do you log tree climbing caches that you cannot reach or puzzle caches where you cannot solve the puzzle?

[+NeverSummer]

What if I log the cache online, and in the same log I drop a TB in the cache.

Then the owner of the cache can't delete that log right?

 

First, the owner can delete every log. Whether it is legitimate is a different question.

Second, the trackable logs do not get deleted if a cache log is deleted.

Third, what is the problem with logging a note if you do not qualify for a challenge cache?

 

Do you log tree climbing caches that you cannot reach or puzzle caches where you cannot solve the puzzle?

Find the container. Sign the logbook. Log your find online. (paraphrased from Jeremy himself)

[+The Jester]

What if I log the cache online, and in the same log I drop a TB in the cache.

Then the owner of the cache can't delete that log right?

 

First, the owner can delete every log. Whether it is legitimate is a different question.

Second, the trackable logs do not get deleted if a cache log is deleted.

Third, what is the problem with logging a note if you do not qualify for a challenge cache?

 

Do you log tree climbing caches that you cannot reach or puzzle caches where you cannot solve the puzzle?

Find the container. Sign the logbook. Log your find online. (paraphrased from Jeremy himself)

You just can't accept that there is an exception to a guideline*, can you? Did you argue with your English teacher about "I before E except after C..." becuse it had an exception? That seems like what you have been doing for the last several threads about challenge caches - "you can't have an exception to the 'find/sign/log' principle!" It's beginning to sound childish - "it has to be my way, bacause I want that way! Wah!!!" It tiring in a child, but even moreso in an adult.

 

 

*It's not a 'rule' hard and fast, but a general principle with some flex to it (i.e.. the exception for challenge caches).

[+NeverSummer]

What if I log the cache online, and in the same log I drop a TB in the cache.

Then the owner of the cache can't delete that log right?

 

First, the owner can delete every log. Whether it is legitimate is a different question.

Second, the trackable logs do not get deleted if a cache log is deleted.

Third, what is the problem with logging a note if you do not qualify for a challenge cache?

 

Do you log tree climbing caches that you cannot reach or puzzle caches where you cannot solve the puzzle?

Find the container. Sign the logbook. Log your find online. (paraphrased from Jeremy himself)

You just can't accept that there is an exception to a guideline*, can you? Did you argue with your English teacher about "I before E except after C..." becuse it had an exception? That seems like what you have been doing for the last several threads about challenge caches - "you can't have an exception to the 'find/sign/log' principle!" It's beginning to sound childish - "it has to be my way, bacause I want that way! Wah!!!" It tiring in a child, but even moreso in an adult.

 

 

*It's not a 'rule' hard and fast, but a general principle with some flex to it (i.e.. the exception for challenge caches).

I can. It's a statement to refute what cezanne is saying. The idea of the guideline is one thing, but that guideline is in conflict with the fundamental basis of the gameplay on geocaching.com. Other "cache" types that have other requirements are classified with a separate guideline altogether. Because "challenge caches" fall under the umbrella of physical "Mystery/Puzzle" caches, there is an "asterisk" to the guidelines to make the exception for "challenge caches". I think this is not a good place for that asterisk, correct.

 

The guidelines should be more clear for standard, physical geocaches for the "find it, sign it, log it online" basis and foundational aspect of the physical geocaching game. It's not a guideline, no. So I don't have a problem with it.

 

I'm not crying "Wah!!!" as you claim. Rather, I'm surprised that cezanne keeps coming back with the same broken record and straw men about finding geocaches; I have to keep coming back to remind them. Speaking of petulance... But if you want to deflect the valid discussion about physical geocaching and the related logging guidelines by calling me a baby, go ahead and stoop to that level.

 

The guidelines for caches don't say anywhere that you can't log a find on a "tree climbing cache" or a Puzzle because you didn't climb the tree or happen to solve the puzzle. Therein is the problem with "challenge caches" being under the Mystery/Puzzle guidelines--you don't have to solve a puzzle or complete any other task to be able to find the cache and log it online. Just because you don't agree doesn't mean you can come in a start calling me a baby, or declare my opinion as childish. Try to keep this on the up-and-up, eh?

 

If we want to talk about rules, here they are:

1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

So if I adhere to the rules, don't I log a cache I find it? Aren't then the guidelines just a "guiding principle" to the rules?

 

[edit to fix broken links]

Edited October 3, 2014 by NeverSummer

[+Harry Dolphin]

 

Personally, I think challenge caches have outgrown the "staging ground" of the mystery/puzzle cache type, and are ready for their own cache type. But Groundspeak hasn't put me in charge of that decision... yet.

 

I agree a separate cache type is a good idea. Not only for searching, but because they have their own specific rules/guidelines.

 

I'm less convinced about breaking the link with physical caches; awarding badges etc (which have been suggested in this thread).

 

Yes. I think a new cache type would be the best solution. I have no interest in badges. Sign log/fulfill requirements would work best as its own cache type. Similar to the grandfathered Webcam. (Post photo taken by webcam.) Or Virtuals. (Answer question asked.)

[+The A-Team]

Other "cache" types that have other requirements are classified with a separate guideline altogether. Because "challenge caches" fall under the umbrella of physical "Mystery/Puzzle" caches, there is an "asterisk" to the guidelines to make the exception for "challenge caches".

Since challenge caches aren't their own type, their logging guidelines are an exception under the Mystery logging guideline. If challenge caches were given their own type, their logging guidelines would be under their own sub-heading and the exception under Mystery would be removed.

 

...seems pretty simple to me. I'm trying to understand why there's basically 4 pages of discussion about the location of some guidelines on a page...

[+NeverSummer]

I'm trying to understand why there's basically 4 pages of discussion about the location of some guidelines on a page...

2 reasons:

1. People keep coming back to this thread and commenting.

2. The position of the guideline matters when the rules are different for cache types.

 

Therein is why we don't see things like "if there's a tree to be climbed, you have to do that to be able to log a find" or "you must prove you went to each stage of a multi to log a find" or "you must solve the puzzle and prove that you did so to log a find" or "you must prove that you found all caches before logging a bonus cache", etc. Physical caches within the Traditional, Multi, and Mystery/Puzzle are all pretty cut-and-dry for what constitutes a "find" to be logged online. Your log won't be deleted, and if it is, it will very likely be reinstated if appealed.

 

The way I see it, the guideline matters for consistency and learning the game. It would also squash a good percentage of the anxiety about log deletion we see play out from time to time. If the guidelines were adjusted to have "challenge caches" legitimized and with a new, better guided, more clearly reviewed cache type, we'd also do away with some confusion and certainly much of the consternation about how the "challenge cache" is classified currently. (See discussions about searching, PQs, maps, ignore lists, etc. But this thread is about "doing X before logging, so that's the point I'm getting after in this thread)

[+L0ne.R]

What if I log the cache online, and in the same log I drop a TB in the cache.

Then the owner of the cache can't delete that log right?

 

First, the owner can delete every log. Whether it is legitimate is a different question.

Second, the trackable logs do not get deleted if a cache log is deleted.

Third, what is the problem with logging a note if you do not qualify for a challenge cache?

 

Do you log tree climbing caches that you cannot reach or puzzle caches where you cannot solve the puzzle?

Find the container. Sign the logbook. Log your find online. (paraphrased from Jeremy himself)

You just can't accept that there is an exception to a guideline*, can you? Did you argue with your English teacher about "I before E except after C..." becuse it had an exception? That seems like what you have been doing for the last several threads about challenge caches - "you can't have an exception to the 'find/sign/log' principle!" It's beginning to sound childish - "it has to be my way, bacause I want that way! Wah!!!" It tiring in a child, but even moreso in an adult.

 

 

*It's not a 'rule' hard and fast, but a general principle with some flex to it (i.e.. the exception for challenge caches).

Resorting to insults gives the impression that you may feel you are losing in a reasoned argument.

[+The Jester]

What if I log the cache online, and in the same log I drop a TB in the cache.

Then the owner of the cache can't delete that log right?

 

First, the owner can delete every log. Whether it is legitimate is a different question.

Second, the trackable logs do not get deleted if a cache log is deleted.

Third, what is the problem with logging a note if you do not qualify for a challenge cache?

 

Do you log tree climbing caches that you cannot reach or puzzle caches where you cannot solve the puzzle?

Find the container. Sign the logbook. Log your find online. (paraphrased from Jeremy himself)

You just can't accept that there is an exception to a guideline*, can you? Did you argue with your English teacher about "I before E except after C..." becuse it had an exception? That seems like what you have been doing for the last several threads about challenge caches - "you can't have an exception to the 'find/sign/log' principle!" It's beginning to sound childish - "it has to be my way, bacause I want that way! Wah!!!" It tiring in a child, but even moreso in an adult.

 

 

*It's not a 'rule' hard and fast, but a general principle with some flex to it (i.e.. the exception for challenge caches).

I can. It's a statement to refute what cezanne is saying. The idea of the guideline is one thing, but that guideline is in conflict with the fundamental basis of the gameplay on geocaching.com. Other "cache" types that have other requirements are classified with a separate guideline altogether. Because "challenge caches" fall under the umbrella of physical "Mystery/Puzzle" caches, there is an "asterisk" to the guidelines to make the exception for "challenge caches". I think this is not a good place for that asterisk, correct.

 

The guidelines should be more clear for standard, physical geocaches for the "find it, sign it, log it online" basis and foundational aspect of the physical geocaching game. It's not a guideline, no. So I don't have a problem with it.

If you don't have a problem, why do you keep saying there's something wrong and must be corrected. You can accept the exception, but then go on about how it must be changed. Excuse me if I don't believe you when you say you accept the exception and don't have a problem.

 

I'm not crying "Wah!!!" as you claim. Rather, I'm surprised that cezanne keeps coming back with the same broken record and straw men about finding geocaches; I have to keep coming back to remind them. Speaking of petulance... But if you want to deflect the valid discussion about physical geocaching and the related logging guidelines by calling me a baby, go ahead and stoop to that level.

 

The guidelines for caches don't say anywhere that you can't log a find on a "tree climbing cache" or a Puzzle because you didn't climb the tree or happen to solve the puzzle. Therein is the problem with "challenge caches" being under the Mystery/Puzzle guidelines--you don't have to solve a puzzle or complete any other task to be able to find the cache and log it online. Just because you don't agree doesn't mean you can come in a start calling me a baby, or declare my opinion as childish. Try to keep this on the up-and-up, eh?

I never said you are a baby or your opinion is childish, I said your repeating the same line over and over is starting to sound childish.

 

If we want to talk about rules, here they are:

1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

So if I adhere to the rules, don't I log a cache I find it? Aren't then the guidelines just a "guiding principle" to the rules?

 

[edit to fix broken links]

How about not hunting caches you haven't qualified for? They are under the "?" category, so you have to read the page before heading out, so you know you haven't qualified, so why load it to the GPSr? Then when you find a cache you can follow the 'rules'.

[+The Jester]

I'm trying to understand why there's basically 4 pages of discussion about the location of some guidelines on a page...

2 reasons:

1. People keep coming back to this thread and commenting.

And your the number one person coming back to this thread.

2. The position of the guideline matters when the rules are different for cache types.

 

Therein is why we don't see things like "if there's a tree to be climbed, you have to do that to be able to log a find" or "you must prove you went to each stage of a multi to log a find" or "you must solve the puzzle and prove that you did so to log a find" or "you must prove that you found all caches before logging a bonus cache", etc. Physical caches within the Traditional, Multi, and Mystery/Puzzle are all pretty cut-and-dry for what constitutes a "find" to be logged online. Your log won't be deleted, and if it is, it will very likely be reinstated if appealed.

 

The way I see it, the guideline matters for consistency and learning the game. It would also squash a good percentage of the anxiety about log deletion we see play out from time to time. If the guidelines were adjusted to have "challenge caches" legitimized and with a new, better guided, more clearly reviewed cache type, we'd also do away with some confusion and certainly much of the consternation about how the "challenge cache" is classified currently. (See discussions about searching, PQs, maps, ignore lists, etc. But this thread is about "doing X before logging, so that's the point I'm getting after in this thread)

Challenge caches are legitimized in the guidelines already - it's what you've been complaining about for threads.

[cezanne]

The guidelines for caches don't say anywhere that you can't log a find on a "tree climbing cache" or a Puzzle because you didn't climb the tree or happen to solve the puzzle.

 

Of course they don't. I just asked the OP a question. The answer could be Yes, No, Depends on the situation etc

 

I'm fully aware of the inconsistency with respect to challenge caches, but I still do not understand why the OP spends his time with thinking about tricks (like the one with logging trackables that does not work) to enforce a found it log for a challenge cache he does not qualify for. The inconsistency that you do not appreciate would still be there if there existed such a workaround. It has not been my intent to start the same type of arguments we had before again.

Edited October 4, 2014 by cezanne

[+NeverSummer]

If we want to talk about rules, here they are:

1. If you take something from the geocache (or "cache"), leave something of equal or greater value.

2. Write about your find in the cache logbook.

3. Log your experience at www.geocaching.com.

 

So if I adhere to the rules, don't I log a cache I find it? Aren't then the guidelines just a "guiding principle" to the rules?

 

[edit to fix broken links]

How about not hunting caches you haven't qualified for? They are under the "?" category, so you have to read the page before heading out, so you know you haven't qualified, so why load it to the GPSr? Then when you find a cache you can follow the 'rules'.

First, it is rules, not 'rules'.

 

Second, I see nothing in the rules about qualifying for geocache finds.

 

Third, if the cache is listed at the coordinates, it's not unlike other puzzles I've solved that are at the coordinates. I can find the container and log my find online.

 

If you want to believe that I have a problem with challenge caches, you're wrong. I don't have a problem with them. What I have a problem with is described in the other threads--on topic.

 

Insofar as not being able to "log this cache until you did X", I see a bit of the former ALR problem here: Challenges are starting to see the "wow factor" and other less consistent review processes showing up. The number of these caches are on the rise, and without clear, objective guidance that is consistent across borders, I think we might end up seeing even more issues.

 

Lastly, I come back and comment because people quote me and comment/reply/argue. Most folks are the first 2, and some are the last. If you want to call me childish for continuing to be consistent about my replies and comments to those who try to create straw men, or niggle with examples where it "might work", go ahead. (Oh, and don't leave out cezanne as another person who keeps coming back to this thread.)

[+tozainamboku]

I find both sides childish (or at least arcane). You are arguing over an online log that was added by Geocaching.com with no intent to either support the idea of ALRs (geocaching challenges or other types) or the the idea that the count of Found logs is some score and that finding a cache and signing a physical log somehow gives you the right to be able to log an online find without the cache owner's interference.

 

At some point early on, Groundspeak realized that the online log could be misused - perhaps by spammers or by someone who wanted to insult the cache owner, or more likely by someone who sat in front of a computer entering bogus logs for caches they never even looked for. TPTB gave the cache owner the ability to delete logs and told them to delete any logs that were bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. The italicized section has since been changed to 'otherwise inappropriate', but the original language gave cache owners the ability to have ALRs and delete logs that didn't follow these ALRs. For years, people complained about ALRs and TPTB did nothing.

 

Eventually they went through a number of iterations to deal with various issues people had with online found logs being deleted. One of these was to require that caches with ALRs be listed as mystery caches so people would read the page before searching for the cache and know if there were additional requirements for an online log. This resulted in many new geocaching related challenges. Prior to this, challenges almost always required a special exception from the guidelines and thus the number of challenges was kept small.

 

At some point, TPTB decided that allowing ALRs as mystery caches was one of their better mistakes and changed the rules again - adding a poorly worded section (IMO) to the guidelines on when physical caches could be logged. The also decided to make an exception if the ALR was a geocaching related challenge and later added information in the help center as to what a geocaching related challenge can be.

 

So here's the current rules: When you find a cache:

1. If you take something, leave an item of greater or equal value ( who decides value? can a cache owner delete your online log if he thinks you traded unfairly?)
   
2. Write about your find in the cache logbook ( write about your find? on a nano scroll? I can't even fit my name on a nano scroll. And what if I write a whole page and forget to sign my name - can a cache owner delete my find?)
   
3. Log your experience at geocaching.com ( it says log your experience - not log a find. Seems I could find a challenge cache and follow this rule by logging a note. But - what happens if I don't log anything online? Can the cache owner cross my name off the physical log because I didn't follow the rules?)
   

So the 'rules' (sorry I have to use quotes here) aren't really rules. They're more of a description on how the game is most commonly played. And rather than being inconsistent with the guidelines for when the cache owner can delete the online found it log, they seem to allow the game to be played with at least some types of ALRs. Athough I believe the online find was not originally intended as a score or a way to support making challenge caches, I've long accepted that there is a significant part of the community who chose to view the online found log as the WIGAS log. Rather than letting them get in the way of my enjoying the game, I make an allowance for these players and log notes on challenge caches that I find. If you want an accurate count (per whatever definition) of the caches you found, I suggest keeping your own tally and not relying on the WIGAS count.

Edited October 6, 2014 by tozainamboku

[+NeverSummer]

I find both sides childish (or at least arcane). You are arguing over an online log that was added by Geocaching.com with no intent to either support the idea of ALRs (geocaching challenges or other types) or the the idea that the count of Found logs is some score and that finding a cache and signing a physical log somehow gives you the right to be able to log an online find without the cache owner's interference.

 

At some point early on, Groundspeak realized that the online log could be misused - perhaps by spammers or by someone who wanted to insult the cache owner, or more likely by someone who sat in front of a computer entering bogus logs for caches they never even looked for. TPTB gave the cache owner the ability to delete logs and told them to delete any logs that were bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. The italicized section has since been changed to 'otherwise inappropriate', but the original language gave cache owners the ability to have ALRs and delete logs that didn't follow these ALRs. For years, people complained about ALRs and TPTB did nothing.

 

Eventually they went through a number of iterations to deal with various issues people had with online found logs being deleted. One of these was to require that caches with ALRs be listed as mystery caches so people would read the page before searching for the cache and know if there were additional requirements for an online log. This resulted in many new geocaching related challenges. Prior to this, challenges almost always required a special exception from the guidelines and thus the number of challenges was kept small.

 

At some point, TPTB decided that allowing ALRs as mystery caches was one of their better mistakes and changed the rules again - adding a poorly worded section (IMO) to the guidelines on when physical caches could be logged. The also decided to make an exception if the ALR was a geocaching related challenge and later added information in the help center as to what a geocaching related challenge can be.

 

So here's the current rules: When you find a cache:

1. If you take something, leave an item of greater or equal value ( who decides value? can a cache owner delete your online log if he thinks you traded unfairly?)
   
2. Write about your find in the cache logbook ( write about your find? on a nano scroll? I can't even fit my name on a nano scroll. And what if I write a whole page and forget to sign my name - can a cache owner delete my find?)
   
3. Log your experience at geocaching.com ( it says log your experience - not log a find. Seems I could find a challenge cache and follow this rule by logging a note. But - what happens if I don't log anything online? Can the cache owner cross my name off the physical log because I didn't follow the rules?)
   

So the 'rules' (sorry I have to use quotes here) aren't really rules. They're more of a description on how the game is most commonly played. And rather than being inconsistent with the guidelines for when the cache owner can delete the online found it log, they seem to allow the game to be played with at least some types of ALRs. Athough I believe the online find was not originally intended as a score or a way to support making challenge caches, I've long accepted that there is a significant part of the community who chose to view the online found log as the WIGAS log. Rather than letting them get in the way of my enjoying the game, I make an allowance for these players and log notes on challenge caches that I find. If you want an accurate count (per whatever definition) of the caches you found, I suggest keeping your own tally and not relying on the WIGAS count.

Once again, you've done a smashing job of outlining a number of things clearly and accurately. Thanks for that, really.

 

The issue I have is less to do with "challenge caches" in general, and more to do with click-through, clarity, consistency, and how the site leads new users through the site to help them learn well. See my most recent post in the Website forum.

 

Really, it's the behind-the-curtain stuff that needs to get sorted out on this subject. Gameplay can go on in the same way it does today, but there are some things that I personally think that Goundspeak should address to make things more clear and consistent for new and existing players.