Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8
irid3sc3nt

Less than ten finds... creating geocaches?

128 posts in this topic

In my area I was surprised to find a new geocache published by a user who had specifically stated in their geocache description that they had became a member a half hour ago. They had about seven finds.

Their cache gets published. People went to find it. It wasn't there because they hadn't set it out yet. Then after they set it out, it was muggled. Oh, but they found it and put it back.

About a week later, they get another cache published. It has no details/description and no hint. Nothing. Two people went to find it again (and these people have over 1000+ caches between them). Can't find it. In fact, the area is mostly water and muck and the d/t is 1.5 for both.

 

I feel angry that these caches have even been published. Why would a reviewer publish these? It seems like it would be a good idea to have a certain amount of finds + time being a member before hiding caches.

0

Share this post


Link to post

This is a dead horse that has already been beaten to dust.

 

If you find major issues with the cache or the cache listing, use "Needs Maintenance" or "Needs Archived" to relay your concerns. The cacher's find count is not relevant.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I share your irritation with new inexperienced cachers posting caches before they've really experienced the game and shown some level of commitment. However, narcissa is unfortunately right. For years people have come to the forum to complain but restrictions are never likely to happen. Needs Maintenance and Needs Archive are the best tools at our disposal. Don't be afraid to use them.

0

Share this post


Link to post

It has no details/description and no hint. Nothing. ... Why would a reviewer publish these?

 

I'm a little surprised that a reviewer would publish what sounds like a blank cache description.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I feel angry that these caches have even been published. Why would a reviewer publish these? It seems like it would be a good idea to have a certain amount of finds + time being a member before hiding caches.

Reviewers publish all caches that meet the listing guidelines, regardless of whether the hider has zero finds or 10,000. Once you point me to a place in the listing guidelines where a minimum finds requirement is specified, I'll stop doing that.

 

It has no details/description and no hint. Nothing. ... Why would a reviewer publish these?

 

I'm a little surprised that a reviewer would publish what sounds like a blank cache description.

We are allowed to question listings with blank cache descriptions ("Are you sure this is ready? A good cache description is helpful because..."). But, once the hider says "yep, it's good to go," then we publish the cache. Once you point me to a place in the listing guidelines where a minimum number of words requirement is specified, I'll stop doing that.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Well, thanks for the input, everyone.

 

It's nice to know that there are other people baffled about this, but sad to find out that there isn't much to do about it.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Caveat emptor.

 

When you seek a FTF, especially from a new hider, you run the risk of a problem hide. Want less risk? Let a couple of others find it first.

0

Share this post


Link to post

In my area I was surprised to find a new geocache published by a very experienced geocacher who had specifically stated in their geocache description that they had became a member over a decade ago. They had about seven thousand finds.

 

Their cache gets published. People went to find it. It was in a frigging parking lot. About a week later, they get another cache published. Again, it was in a parking lot.

 

I feel angry that these caches have even been published. Why would a reviewer publish these lame caches?

 

So seriously, to be honest I find most new cachers are hiding much better caches than the average cache being hidden by veteran cachers. There are so many people that are simply interested in the numbers, that any old random spot that doesn't have a cache is a potential hiding spot for the numbers crowd who have been caching for a decade or more.

 

In contrast, newbie cachers who have not been corrupted by numbers are still excited about geocaching, the treasure hunt, and want to show off a secret spot or location that they know about and want to bring people to. Sure, sometimes they are too excited and haven't hidden it yet, or don't know how to use their GPS and have lousy coordinates, or even don't know what makes an appropriate container. But you know what - in almost all cases the location and experience looking for a newbie cacher's first hide is much more exciting and rewarding than finding a veteran's lamp post cache, guard rail cache, or random spot on the side of the road cache.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Well, thanks for the input, everyone.

 

It's nice to know that there are other people baffled about this, but sad to find out that there isn't much to do about it.

 

Im also in your area and am one of the cachers that found one of these caches (in fact I was the FTF and the one of them was better than about 60-70% of the caches in our area. Pretty sad that a member for 30 min can hide a more creative cache than that many experienced cachers. It was hidden by a kid and he kind of copied some of my caches with the pulley system in the tree. He found some of my pulley caches before he hid his. :P It was also neat to see the tree memorial there. Regardless I believe that it would be a good Idea to make minimum finds a requirement due to all of the 3 finds, hide and dones. Nice to see a local cacher on the forums! :)

 

Edit- I just looked at my map and for the first time saw the no description geocache. It is about a tenth of a mile from me and it the open space where two of my caches are hidden. Ill take a look on saturday or sunday and see whats up. The no description thing is honestly unacceptable in my book.

Edited by BigLinc16
0

Share this post


Link to post

I feel angry that these caches have even been published. Why would a reviewer publish these? It seems like it would be a good idea to have a certain amount of finds + time being a member before hiding caches.

Reviewers publish all caches that meet the listing guidelines, regardless of whether the hider has zero finds or 10,000. Once you point me to a place in the listing guidelines where a minimum finds requirement is specified, I'll stop doing that.

While not given as a reason for not publishing - the very first paragraph in the guidelines (after the briansnat quote about finding a better spot) is:

The more geocaches that you have found, the better you will understand the various elements that make up a great geocaching experience. This knowledge will be invaluable when you place a hide, and likely make your geocache more enjoyable for the community. We encourage you to find at least twenty geocaches before you choose to hide one.

 

Frankly, I'd prefer the space be used for providing the rationale for some of the guidelines the reviewers do enforce. But apparently TPTB think it's important to make some suggestions that they aren't going to enforce.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Well, thanks for the input, everyone.

 

It's nice to know that there are other people baffled about this, but sad to find out that there isn't much to do about it.

 

There is lots you can do about it.

 

Be selective about the caches you search for.

 

Report problems in your logs to alert other finders.

 

Use the site features to report issues that need more attention.

 

Hide good caches that you would enjoy finding.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I have seen similar hides locally from new members with few finds. Last one I found the coordinates were off by 130 feet, so we averaged the coordinates and posted them with our log. The CO corrected the coordinates, the cache is still there, but the owner seems to have left the game after playing for about two weeks.

 

It's just a game, so no worrys if new members want to hide a geocache.

0

Share this post


Link to post

To me it comes down to the person. A person who just started and is excited about it might make a great cache. One no one has ever even thought of. They might want to make a good impression and take time to get good coords and a great spot they know as well. They could also mess it up but get them to learn how to do it better in the future.

Like said here a cacher with a bunch of experience might just place a container they found at a open location that is not interesting and not care if there coords are perfect. It just depends on the person so making the new excited cacher not be able to hide caches is probably not really right either.

I probably feel this way because we started hiding caches after a week but only had went out and found caches for 2 days. Those caches are still there a few years later.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The need archived button is like the BIG RED BOTTOM... Hit it at your own risk.

 

Dont blame me when the Russian are looking for you.

 

Just email your reviewer and he/she will look it over. <_<

0

Share this post


Link to post

Its funny that I had very few finds when I hidden my first cache and I did it right. :blink:

 

I think its silly to force people to find so many caches before they hidden their first one.

0

Share this post


Link to post
the owner seems to have left the game after playing for about two weeks.
This is an issue that might be addressable. I think the number of finds is the wrong measure. But if someone has had an account for at least a few weeks, then the odds of them giving up on the hobby a few weeks after hiding a cache are probably lower.
0

Share this post


Link to post

Have you tried contacting the CO? Maybe they don't realize that there is an issue with their cache, and they might appreciate a more experienced cacher reaching out to them to help them improve!

0

Share this post


Link to post

http://coord.info/GC5AK1D

 

Coords have been off by 450 feet for over six months, and the owner last logged in a week after he hid it. Don't think it's in a watertight container and that there are any plans on maintaining it. There really isn't any way to prevent this. They joined a year before, and it often happens with hundreds of finds. Plenty of people do this part time and that will never change.

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
0

Share this post


Link to post
1423808549[/url]' post='5472956']

Have you tried contacting the CO? Maybe they don't realize that there is an issue with their cache, and they might appreciate a more experienced cacher reaching out to them to help them improve!

 

When someone leaves a log the cache owner gets an email. A string of DNF emails for a 1.5 difficulty cache suggests there may be a problem. Emailing the owner would be redundant. Also keep in mind you may be contacting a child. Lots more grade school children with smartphones out there playing this game without parental supervision, although legally they shouldn't be using the site.

0

Share this post


Link to post
1423808564[/url]' post='5472957']

http://coord.info/GC5AK1D

 

Coords have been off by 450 feet for over six months, and the owner last logged in a week after he hid it. Don't think it's in a watertight container and that there are any plans on maintaining it. There really isn't any way to prevent this. They joined a year before, and it often happens with hundreds of finds. Plenty of people do this part time and that will never change.

 

From the profile photo it does look like a child (about 10/11 years old) hid the cache. There needs to be a check box on the submission form that reads 'I am 18 years old or older'.

Glad to see someone finally post an NM. In a week someone should post an NA.

0

Share this post


Link to post

http://coord.info/GC5AK1D

 

Coords have been off by 450 feet for over six months, and the owner last logged in a week after he hid it. Don't think it's in a watertight container and that there are any plans on maintaining it. There really isn't any way to prevent this. They joined a year before, and it often happens with hundreds of finds. Plenty of people do this part time and that will never change.

 

And it's taken 6 months before someone finally posted a post a "Needs Maintenance" log!

 

Experienced cachers, with thousands of logged finds each, just post their "found it" logs and move on.

 

The same goes for the CO's other caches. Bad coords, finders not posting "NM" logs.

 

http://coord.info/GC5AK1J

http://coord.info/GC5AK10

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
0

Share this post


Link to post

To wmpastor's comments...

 

"Caveat emptor.

 

When you seek a FTF, especially from a new hider, you run the risk of a problem hide. Want less risk? Let a couple of others find it first."

 

I say amen!

 

If you choose to be the "Beta Tester" you get what you get.

0

Share this post


Link to post

To wmpastor's comments...

 

"Caveat emptor.

 

When you seek a FTF, especially from a new hider, you run the risk of a problem hide. Want less risk? Let a couple of others find it first."

 

I say amen!

 

If you choose to be the "Beta Tester" you get what you get.

 

Still no excuse for under-age children hiding and posting caches. There needs to be more in-your-face legal-looking checks on the site to warn kids that they cannot use the site and cannot post caches without specific parental permission (and their parents should be obligated to have an account with a valid working email address). I don't understand why Groundspeak turns a blind eye. There are a number of kids who actually say they're a kid in their cache description. There are a number of kids that post their photo in their profile or in their gallery. There are a number of kids who come to the forums asking about hiding caches and reveal that they are not yet a teenager. And a whole lot between the ages of 13-17 without explicit parental supervision.

 

Also it's no excuse for very poor coordinates.

No excuse for abandoning the cache and listing.

No excuse for not getting a feel for the game and feeling you are committed to cache ownership before you hide a cache.

No excuse for not picking up a cache and archiving it if you decide geocaching is not for you a week after you hide a cache.

No excuse for the caching community not posting NMs and NAs, letting the cache be a problem for future finders.

Edited by L0ne.R
0

Share this post


Link to post

Caveat emptor.

 

When you seek a FTF, especially from a new hider, you run the risk of a problem hide. Want less risk? Let a couple of others find it first.

 

You are 100% correct. The FTF hounds come in handy when it comes to new hiders. Let them rush out and find that the cache hasn't been placed yet or the coordinates are 150ft off or the cache is placed somewhere surrounded by "no trespassing" signs.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Caveat emptor.

 

When you seek a FTF, especially from a new hider, you run the risk of a problem hide. Want less risk? Let a couple of others find it first.

 

You are 100% correct. The FTF hounds come in handy when it comes to new hiders. Let them rush out and find that the cache hasn't been placed yet or the coordinates are 150ft off or the cache is placed somewhere surrounded by "no trespassing" signs.

 

That's what makes the FTF hunt so much more interesting, the unknown.

 

I recently drove 130 km round trip for a FTF which I DNFed and later the Co emailed me that he had the wrong coordinates, he still hasn't gotten the correct ones but they are at least 10 km out, probably closer to 20. It's a heck of a nice drive though.

Edited by Roman!
0

Share this post


Link to post
There needs to be more in-your-face legal-looking checks on the site to warn kids that they cannot use the site and cannot post caches without specific parental permission (and their parents should be obligated to have an account with a valid working email address). I don't understand why Groundspeak turns a blind eye. There are a number of kids who actually say they're a kid in their cache description. There are a number of kids that post their photo in their profile or in their gallery. There are a number of kids who come to the forums asking about hiding caches and reveal that they are not yet a teenager. And a whole lot between the ages of 13-17 without explicit parental supervision.

I agree, but who do you think is using these apps?

Mom and Dad are both working and don't know they smoke. Think they know about an app?

What I'm kinda surprised about is a 13 year old can read and post in Off Topic.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Caveat emptor.

 

When you seek a FTF, especially from a new hider, you run the risk of a problem hide. Want less risk? Let a couple of others find it first.

 

You are 100% correct. The FTF hounds come in handy when it comes to new hiders. Let them rush out and find that the cache hasn't been placed yet or the coordinates are 150ft off or the cache is placed somewhere surrounded by "no trespassing" signs.

 

That's what makes the FTF hunt so much more interesting, the unknown.

 

I recently drove 130 km round trip for a FTF which I DNFed and later the Co emailed me that he had the wrong coordinates, he still hasn't gotten the correct ones but they are at least 10 km out, probably closer to 20. It's a heck of a nice drive though.

 

Has anyone posted NMs?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Caveat emptor.

 

When you seek a FTF, especially from a new hider, you run the risk of a problem hide. Want less risk? Let a couple of others find it first.

 

You are 100% correct. The FTF hounds come in handy when it comes to new hiders. Let them rush out and find that the cache hasn't been placed yet or the coordinates are 150ft off or the cache is placed somewhere surrounded by "no trespassing" signs.

 

That's what makes the FTF hunt so much more interesting, the unknown.

 

I recently drove 130 km round trip for a FTF which I DNFed and later the Co emailed me that he had the wrong coordinates, he still hasn't gotten the correct ones but they are at least 10 km out, probably closer to 20. It's a heck of a nice drive though.

 

Has anyone posted NMs?

 

The CO is aware just has to get correct coordinates, the cache is disabled at the moment.

0

Share this post


Link to post

To wmpastor's comments...

 

"Caveat emptor.

 

When you seek a FTF, especially from a new hider, you run the risk of a problem hide. Want less risk? Let a couple of others find it first."

 

I say amen!

 

If you choose to be the "Beta Tester" you get what you get.

 

Still no excuse for under-age children hiding and posting caches. There needs to be more in-your-face legal-looking checks on the site to warn kids that they cannot use the site and cannot post caches without specific parental permission (and their parents should be obligated to have an account with a valid working email address). I don't understand why Groundspeak turns a blind eye. There are a number of kids who actually say they're a kid in their cache description. There are a number of kids that post their photo in their profile or in their gallery. There are a number of kids who come to the forums asking about hiding caches and reveal that they are not yet a teenager. And a whole lot between the ages of 13-17 without explicit parental supervision.

 

Also it's no excuse for very poor coordinates.

No excuse for abandoning the cache and listing.

No excuse for not getting a feel for the game and feeling you are committed to cache ownership before you hide a cache.

No excuse for not picking up a cache and archiving it if you decide geocaching is not for you a week after you hide a cache.

No excuse for the caching community not posting NMs and NAs, letting the cache be a problem for future finders.

 

I've been toying with the idea of posting NA logs on all 3 of the caches.

 

I'm stunned that the people who have managed to find these caches haven't made any effort to follow the NM - NA process.

 

How does such a young kid get involved in geocaching without their parents' knowledge and consent? Do such young children roam the internet, and sign up for various things, unsupervised? :blink:

 

 

B.

0

Share this post


Link to post
How does such a young kid get involved in geocaching without their parents' knowledge and consent? Do such young children roam the internet, and sign up for various things, unsupervised? :blink:

 

 

B.

Sure.

A Sister used to have virus' on her computer all the time.

CJ would fix it...aaannd right back on again a few days later.

Turns out the boys were on sites they weren't supposed to be on.

Often.

She was mortified, CJ said nothing and I thought it funny.

- Both parents working, thinking they don't need someone to watch 'em while they're on the commute home.

"Little angels..."

0

Share this post


Link to post

To wmpastor's comments...

 

"Caveat emptor.

 

When you seek a FTF, especially from a new hider, you run the risk of a problem hide. Want less risk? Let a couple of others find it first."

 

I say amen!

 

If you choose to be the "Beta Tester" you get what you get.

 

Still no excuse for under-age children hiding and posting caches. There needs to be more in-your-face legal-looking checks on the site to warn kids that they cannot use the site and cannot post caches without specific parental permission (and their parents should be obligated to have an account with a valid working email address). I don't understand why Groundspeak turns a blind eye. There are a number of kids who actually say they're a kid in their cache description. There are a number of kids that post their photo in their profile or in their gallery. There are a number of kids who come to the forums asking about hiding caches and reveal that they are not yet a teenager. And a whole lot between the ages of 13-17 without explicit parental supervision.

 

Also it's no excuse for very poor coordinates.

No excuse for abandoning the cache and listing.

No excuse for not getting a feel for the game and feeling you are committed to cache ownership before you hide a cache.

No excuse for not picking up a cache and archiving it if you decide geocaching is not for you a week after you hide a cache.

No excuse for the caching community not posting NMs and NAs, letting the cache be a problem for future finders.

 

I've been toying with the idea of posting NA logs on all 3 of the caches.

 

I'm stunned that the people who have managed to find these caches haven't made any effort to follow the NM - NA process.

 

How does such a young kid get involved in geocaching without their parents' knowledge and consent? Do such young children roam the internet, and sign up for various things, unsupervised? :blink:

 

 

B.

 

Children are remarkably adept at figuring out how these devices work. It's frightening, really. And you'd be surprised at how many parents give their kids phones.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Well, thanks for the input, everyone.

 

It's nice to know that there are other people baffled about this, but sad to find out that there isn't much to do about it.

 

There is lots you can do about it.

 

Be selective about the caches you search for.

 

Report problems in your logs to alert other finders.

 

Use the site features to report issues that need more attention.

 

Hide good caches that you would enjoy finding.

+1

 

Had two missing FTF's last year by new cachers which had wrong coordinates last year. In both cases the CO corrected the location and one of these days I will go for them again.

 

More then number of finds, number of days with different CO's makes more sense. I mean how much do you learn about hiding a cache with 1000 identical Power Trail hides? 10 types with 10 different hiders much better.

 

However the Lilly Pad doesn't want to change anything so use the NM, NA, Email the CO and the reviewer and move on.

0

Share this post


Link to post

To me it comes down to the person. A person who just started and is excited about it might make a great cache. One no one has ever even thought of. They might want to make a good impression and take time to get good coords and a great spot they know as well. They could also mess it up but get them to learn how to do it better in the future.

I agree that a newbie hider could do a good job, and that's one of several reasons not to add a limit, but, honestly, I think it's much more common for a newbie to think he's thought of something no one has ever thought of, but actually the idea's been thought of so thoroughly that it's not allowed, or done so often it's considered lame. I'm guessing a high percentage of newbie hides are rejected before we ever see them because they're violating the guidelines, and another large chunk violate the guidelines, but aren't immediately rejected because the newbie doesn't describe them accurately to the reviewer.

 

The point being that while it's certainly not a good idea to restrict newbies, that doesn't mean it's not a good idea to encourage newbies to have sufficient experience before they start hiding. That would be good practical advice, and it just happens to also delay the newbie a little so he doesn't hide until he's through the period where he's not yet truly committed to the hobby.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I'd like to see a minimum find count before hiding, but the legs have been beaten off that dead horse so why bother. It's too easy to fake finds anyway.There's no published guideline for integrity.

 

On the flip side, there are players around who have thousands of finds and have hidden dozens or more caches, who still don't get it right.

0

Share this post


Link to post
1423808564[/url]' post='5472957']

http://coord.info/GC5AK1D

 

Coords have been off by 450 feet for over six months, and the owner last logged in a week after he hid it. Don't think it's in a watertight container and that there are any plans on maintaining it. There really isn't any way to prevent this. They joined a year before, and it often happens with hundreds of finds. Plenty of people do this part time and that will never change.

 

From the profile photo it does look like a child (about 10/11 years old) hid the cache. There needs to be a check box on the submission form that reads 'I am 18 years old or older'.

Glad to see someone finally post an NM. In a week someone should post an NA.

 

I didn't take a close look at the photo as I pulled it up on my phone, and it appears that in many of these cases that age is a bigger factor than find count.

 

 

That darn Dave Ulmer partially buried a leaky bucket on private property without permission, and with food in it. This will happen..

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
0

Share this post


Link to post
There needs to be more in-your-face legal-looking checks on the site to warn kids that they cannot use the site and cannot post caches without specific parental permission (and their parents should be obligated to have an account with a valid working email address). I don't understand why Groundspeak turns a blind eye. There are a number of kids who actually say they're a kid in their cache description. There are a number of kids that post their photo in their profile or in their gallery. There are a number of kids who come to the forums asking about hiding caches and reveal that they are not yet a teenager. And a whole lot between the ages of 13-17 without explicit parental supervision.

I agree, but who do you think is using these apps?

Mom and Dad are both working and don't know they smoke. Think they know about an app?

What I'm kinda surprised about is a 13 year old can read and post in Off Topic.

 

To be fair, there have been quite a few 13-17 year old kids posting in the forums that act a lot more mature than some of the elders.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post

I love reading theough these forums and yet I am not 18 y/o. I have hidden over 13 geocaches and hosted soon to be 3 events. Unless if people are lying in their logs it seems that all my finds are quite good, as with my event.

 

I find it sort of offensive that some people think it's not alright for people under the age of 18 to hide a geocache based on their age.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I hid my first cache in 2002 about 5 months before I found one. Judging from the comments, most people who found it liked it. I hid my second cache about a month before I found one. It's still there in slightly modified configuration and people are enjoying it. So I don't think that a cache can be judged on the basis of how many the CO has found before they hid one. If they found a lot of lamposts or went on one power trail they could have a hundred finds and still not really know how to create a good cache.

Edited by KC2WI
0

Share this post


Link to post

I find it sort of offensive that some people think it's not alright for people under the age of 18 to hide a geocache based on their age.

We're not saying it isn't alright for people under 18 to hide a cache. I'm sure there are plenty of examples of great caches hidden by people under 18. It's just they're required to do it under the supervision of a parent or legal guardian.

 

Terms of Use Agreement - 1. C.:

Minors. Our services are not targeted towards, nor intended for use by, anyone under the age of 13. If you are under the age of 13, you are not permitted to use our services. If you are under the age of 18 but at least 13, you may only use our services under the supervision of a parent or legal guardian who agrees to be bound by this Agreement.

 

...and there have been cases where this supervision clearly wasn't occurring.

0

Share this post


Link to post

So I don't think that a cache can be judged on the basis of how many the CO has found before they hid one.

Neither do I.

 

I agree with niraD that there should be a waiting period, not a minimum number of finds. Especially in this age of the smartphone app, many people have short attention spans. They'll download the geocaching app to try it out, then quickly get bored and move on to the next app. I'm sure many of us have seen a cache placed by someone within the first few days of signing up, only to be quickly abandoned and never maintained. Having a waiting period would weed out many of these fly-by-nighters, and the people still wanting to hide a cache by the end of the waiting period would be more likely to stick around long-term. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be a lot better than it is currently. We could debate ad nauseum regarding how long the waiting period should be, but I think anywhere between a couple of weeks and a month would be acceptable. Those who will get bored will likely move on before this time, and those who want to stick around and hide a cache don't have to wait all that long.

 

Of course, this will likely never happen, but we can always dream...

0

Share this post


Link to post

I love reading theough these forums and yet I am not 18 y/o. I have hidden over 13 geocaches and hosted soon to be 3 events. Unless if people are lying in their logs it seems that all my finds are quite good, as with my event.

 

I find it sort of offensive that some people think it's not alright for people under the age of 18 to hide a geocache based on their age.

 

Yes there are some very mature children in society. And some of those use the site properly - with parental permission, participation and supervision. Most don't.

 

Most children (the legal definition of children) use the site autonomously, without explicit parental supervision. Child accounts need to be set up by parents, not by children. If you've hosted an event can I assume then that you have parents who supervise your geocaching activities and gave you permission, read the guidelines, read the terms of use, and helped you set up your account, hopefully geocache too, supervised your cache placement to be sure it conformed to guidelines, and gave you permission to post geocaches to the site after understanding what responsibilities you were agreeing to. And they gave you permission and supervise your participation in the forums.

 

Somehow I think that's true for 1% of the kids that use the geocaching.com site and forums.

Agreeing to guidelines and conditions is a legal thing

 

COPPA law

Groundspeak Terms of Use

Forum Terms of Use

Edited by L0ne.R
0

Share this post


Link to post

 

I agree with niraD that there should be a waiting period, not a minimum number of finds. Especially in this age of the smartphone app, many people have short attention spans. They'll download the geocaching app to try it out, then quickly get bored and move on to the next app.......

 

+1

0

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with niraD that there should be a waiting period, not a minimum number of finds. Especially in this age of the smartphone app, many people have short attention spans. They'll download the geocaching app to try it out, then quickly get bored and move on to the next app.......

 

+1

 

Glad to see that the number of people who think a waiting period would be a good idea, is growing. A few years ago this suggestion was met with silence but I think people are waking up to how much the problem has increased now that the cell phone app has become a dominating factor. It's so much easier to jump into the game with little to no investment or understanding. Much easier for anyone to try out cache ownership for a lark and walk away from the game as soon as they hit the Submit button.

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

I agree with niraD that there should be a waiting period,

After caching for a few years I want to say I agree as well! That is my thoughts now but if I think back to when we started, we found some and thought how cool is this! We could make one! Then we did and it was really fun and exciting! We instantly started looking at containers and places to make good hides. My daughter enjoys hiding them more then finding them. Had there been say a 3 month waiting period... we might have thought well we can't play along and given up. Or we might have found ourselves thinking of finding and not hiding.

The ones who come and hide caches and don't take care of them we can weed out as a community. Some might get a extra find out of the deal. To ban possible good hiders at the start would hurt the game in my opinion.

I think we are in over 3 years and have just made a water resistant container that is far bigger then a 5 gallon bucket that has a O ring and all with a hand carved stamp for a letterbox hide that I think we will be placing tomorrow. We even used the geocaching stencil to spray paint Official Geocache on the side. Had there been a waiting period we might not be playing/hiding today. Not that it would be a big loss to loose us but there might be other cache owners lost by doing something like that.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Several assumptions made on this thread seem somewhat misplaced.

 

Minimum number of finds should be required.

 

Yes, beaten to death to this point. Several experienced cachers set up accounts strictly for hiding so the accounts show little or no find activity. In my area, we have caches hidden by cachers with over 4500 finds that have soft coords, do not follow guidelines, improper D/T ratings, etc. I think Shakespeare once said that number of finds a good hider be not assured.

 

What number should be set. 25, 40, 100, 150? Within 20 miles of me, I have several opportunities for 1.5/1.5 power trails that will get me any of those numbers in a day, not even a full day. How does finding 200 LPCs qualify me to be a quality hider.

 

Unsupervised minors

 

Why are you assuming they are not supervised? Of all the sites I would let my kids on, this would be among them. Periodically checking the message boards and content and setting up a throw away email as well as having them explain to me what they are doing is supervision. Many of you and GS thought getting with the BSA was a good thing, now your complaining that kids in that age range are leaving crappy caches. Before you say it, as someone involved with BSA for many years, supervisions is neither required nor common.

 

Waiting period

 

On the converse side of my above comment, we have 3 or 4 cachers in the area that started placing very challenging high quality caches within a week of signing up. I am in a densely populated area of cachers and that 2 or 3 to 1 ratio of good to bad new hiders seems to hold. I have seen cachers across the country who get it in to hide, not to find, and have some very popular caches. What should the wait period be? 1 week? 1 month? 3 months? A year? Seems you would discourage many very creative people in the process to fix an issue with other resolutions that, in reality, is not as big a problem as one may think.

 

Why do reviewers publish these?

 

As stated earlier, reviewers essentially check two things: Does it meet the guidelines and is it on private private property? (I guess in reality that is only one.) They don't check the age of the hider as it is assumed since they are using the site they have met any obligations there. They don't check cacher popularity, however I am certain if there have been a number of complaints they may scrutinize a little more. They don't check if it is "safe" as cachers assume all risks associated with hunts and they certainly do not check number of hides.

 

Maybe not the case in some of these examples, however it is common for me to see logs "I emptied the water from the container", "Lid missing", "Log a block of ice", "coords were 75 feet off", etc, etc several times over a period of weeks and months and I or the group of people I cache with come along and are the first to post a NM or NA. Even caches placed in areas stated no trespassing or obviously do not meet some other guidelines go with many, many finds with no NM or NA. SHould the CO fix them when they see the logs? Of course. Experience however tells us that is not often the case.

 

Got bad caches in your area? Invite the cacher to an event. Better yet, invite them to go caching with you. Get to know them. Show them why certain things are the way they are even though they may not be required. With few exceptions (unfortunately there are some unaware how to play nice with others), this will fix the problem. For the others we have NM and NA. and I certainly do not want to restrict very creative people that may join more to hide than find or limit those that set up separate accounts for what ever the reason may be solely to hide.

 

Personally, I don't wnat more guidelines. We have put too many guidelines in place already that cater to the lowest common denominator

0

Share this post


Link to post

A waiting period is not a bad idea. Kids should wait until they are 16 to hide something, and others could wait for someone else to be FTF.

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
0

Share this post


Link to post

 

What number should be set. 25, 40, 100, 150? Within 20 miles of me, I have several opportunities for 1.5/1.5 power trails that will get me any of those numbers in a day, not even a full day. How does finding 200 LPCs qualify me to be a quality hider.

 

 

In other words, if you live in an area where there are already a lot of caches it's easy to qualify to become a hider of more caches. If that minimum number were set to, for example, 40 finds what do you suppose would happen in places which had very few hides. According to project-gc, about half of the countries in the world have 40 or fewer caches in the entire country. A minimum number of finds would mean that in countries and regions that could actually use more hides it could become very difficult to qualify to hide more caches.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post

http://coord.info/GC5AK1D

 

Coords have been off by 450 feet for over six months, and the owner last logged in a week after he hid it. Don't think it's in a watertight container and that there are any plans on maintaining it. There really isn't any way to prevent this. They joined a year before, and it often happens with hundreds of finds. Plenty of people do this part time and that will never change.

 

And it's taken 6 months before someone finally posted a post a "Needs Maintenance" log!

 

Experienced cachers, with thousands of logged finds each, just post their "found it" logs and move on.

 

The same goes for the CO's other caches. Bad coords, finders not posting "NM" logs.

 

http://coord.info/GC5AK1J

http://coord.info/GC5AK10

 

 

B.

 

All were disabled this morning, and don't know how the reviewer found out.

 

I think the finders were just trying to give the CO a chance to fix them himself before slapping the NMs on, although a month is plenty of time.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The very first geocache ever was hidden by a geocacher with zero founds.

0

Share this post


Link to post
What should the wait period be? 1 week? 1 month? 3 months? A year? Seems you would discourage many very creative people in the process to fix an issue with other resolutions that, in reality, is not as big a problem as one may think.
I don't think the waiting period needs to be very long. It needs to be more than a week, to filter out the people who find a cache on Saturday, hide one on Sunday, and never play again after that. But the goal isn't to filter out all be the most dedicated geocachers, and the goal isn't to discourage people who are seriously interested in owning and maintaining a cache early in their geocaching career.

 

A month might work nicely. If someone can't wait a month before listing their first cache, then I'd have to question whether they're really interested in owning and maintaining a cache for the long term.

1

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8