Jump to content

One Less Webcam - My Rant...


Rogue23
Followers 8

Recommended Posts

Sounds like a fun Webcam without the requirement.

 

It was a fun webcam. I did do sunrise for it, even though I knew that the CO would be unable to enforce the ALR if I had logged it at noon. I have seen caches with "walls of fame" or something on them, where people that complete the fun optional ALR are listed.

 

Why not make the sunrise thing optional, and create a "Early Bird Honor Roll" (or whatever you want to call it) to honor those that decided to do sunrise?

 

So, I've replied to this suggestion (that I like) twice now, and twice my reply had been deleted. The first time, my reply included a somewhat negative word, so I understand the deletion, but the second time, my post was rated G for sure.

 

I'll try one last time, phrasing things slightly differently (I am not sure why this keeps being deleted, unless someone wants it to look like I am ignoring your suggestion).... My questions is:

 

Would GS allow me to do as you are suggestion, but take it one step further, creating two lists, ie:

 

Wall of Fame (meeting the optional requirement)

Wall of Shame (not meeting the optional requirement)

 

I am not married to these names in any way, but am using them to illustrate a point. The idea would be to make 2 lists in order to not only recognize the past finders but also to discourage people from taking the easy way out. Think of it like Santa's Naughty List. You don't want to be on that, right?

 

MODS - If the word "shame" is not allowed, please censor it or replace with _____. Or at least answer my question before deleting this post. Thank you.

 

Is not that 'shame' is a taboo word, it's that the idea is idiotic. What are you shaming them over? Your cache as it stands does not meet the guidelines and as per said guidelines anyone that captures a screenshot of them standing in view of the camera can claim a find, it's that simple.

 

You have a couple of options, either pen it up and highlight those who do get good sunrise pics or archive.

I would suggest that if you are hell bent on keeping the cache and requirements then archive it here and list it elsewhere.

Link to comment

A couple people doing it improperly in the past with logs you let stand:

2/7/2007--"webcam snafu," claimed find without a webcam pic

1/14/2008--find claimed with family photo taken with camera, no webcam pic

 

I'll just stop there, I'm sure there would be others.

 

You seem to care most that they went at sunrise. I care most that they actually use the webcam. One of my pet peeves is people who claim them that did't actually use the webcam. If you weren't deleting logs back then, why delete them now?

 

On 1/27/2009, you answered someone saying they didn't like the requirements with this:

"No thanks. Most of my caches are not cut out for everyone, and this obviously includes you. Only 19 people have found this cache in the more than 4.5 years it has been active. Those people had what it takes to log this Find, so if I changed the requirements, that would cheapen what they did to earn their Finds. I see it as the same as moving my "CLIMB" Cache from 35 feet up in a tree to the first branch, 6 feet up. And that's just not gonna happen."

 

2 of the 19 finds were bogus--

 

Funny, 6.5 years later and I feel exactly the same. And I was deleting logs that didn't meet the requirement back then.

 

I am sorry if I missed removing some that didn't meet the requirement over the past 11 years. I find it very bizarre that you are hung up on that, as that really doesn't have anything to do with anything. And yes, I specifically allowed for people to log camera finds at this webcam cache for when it was down. Again, the important part to me was getting people to the beach at sunrise, not the mechanism of taking the photo to prove their visit. I think people who were at the right place at the right time should be allowed to log the cache even if the camera was having technical difficulties. You disagree, and that's fine.

 

But I don't see what any of this has to do with anything?

 

It has to do with this:

 

1) You don't always follow your own rules.

2) Since you've allowed pics not taken by the webcam, your cache has NEVER actually followed the GC rules.

 

If you and your cache don't follow the rules--why should folks logging your cache think it's important to follow the rules on your cache?

 

To me, the whole point of a webcam cache is the webcam itself. If someone gets there, and it doesn't work, they log a dnf and enjoy a gorgeous sunrise. If the sunrise is the point--why should the smilie matter if the webcam is out? A sunrise is more than folks get out of most DNFs.

Link to comment

I guess to answer your questions to me specifically more clearly: if you delete some but not others, you are acting in an arbitrary manner. You seem to think it's important that those logging your cache follow the rules, but you don't follow them yourself. If you don't know why I think that's important, I don't think I can really explain it.

Link to comment

I specifically allowed for that (this is explained in the cache description), because way back when, the webcam was a lot less reliable than it is now. To me, the point of this cache was to take people to a beautiful place *at the right time* - not to make them jump through technical hoops to snap a low-res webcam photo of themselves....

 

do you think that it is fair to let some people take pictures with their cellphones when others have "jumped through the technical hoops" ?

Link to comment

A: Hey, my cache is so cool. Groundspeak should allow me to keep enforcing the ALR, as it was legal when it was published 11 years ago! It's not fair to previous finders! And did I say my cache is so cool?

 

B: Well, everyone is playing the game within the same rule. Why can yours be an exception? It can't!

 

Honestly speaking, to me, "A" is more like a *wah wah* baby. I definitely support "B".

Link to comment

My "Rise and Sunshine" webcam (GCJN85) has been online since June 8, 2004 - http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCJN85_rise-and-sunshine

 

It's a surf cam pointing at a beach access on the Atlantic Ocean in Florida. The premise was simple: Be there for sunrise, take a photo, and log your Find. If you wanted to visit at a time other than at sunrise, you were welcome to post a photo and leave a Note.

 

For 11+ years, this was not a problem for 167 Finders. ........

 

I totally agree with you and I completely understand your feelings, but times have changed.

The title of the cache is clear, the description in the cache is clear, you were able to use a simple webcam as a tool to challenge geocachers to do something else then just go to the beach and take a photo to log a find. It is about the experience of being there at sunrise, which I'm sure is different from being there when its busy. I get what you wanted to accomplish with this webcam cache and for many years geocachers got this as well and have taken up the challenge to get up early and I'm sure a lot will still do this in the future (if you keep the webcam alive).

 

But times have changed, its not about the experience anymore for a lot of cachers, there are some that only care about statistics and so they won't care about the CO's intentions with a cache, just about their own goals. I have multi and mystery caches where people just go to the cache without visiting the stages or solving the puzzle, because complete databases with end coordinates etc. are exchanged over here. People want to fill their D/T-grid, earn road trip souvenirs, need 10 different cache types on one day etc. etc. and there is only one rule: if the name is in the logbook (if a webcam photo is taken, if an earth cache answer is given) they can, must and shall claim their find. To me these aren't geocachers, but they are according to the "rules" that so many refer to in their replies on this topic. And there is nothing you can do about this. You have two options: either you enjoy the logs of those who understand your cache and enjoy this little challenge and ignore (without deleting) the others. Or you decide to archive it when there are more "I have the right to log this cache no matter the CO's intentions..."-logs than the type of logs you expected to get and enjoy.

 

I sincerely hope the "real" logs will be the majority and you are able to ignore the others so I will be able to log your cache one day, but if not I can only agree with you to archive the cache since it won't achieve its goal anymore.

Link to comment

I did this Webcam a couple years ago not realizing the time limit was an ALR. This is a pretty mild ALR but it still is one. It's also a bit different from other ALR issues since, as a grandfathered type, you cannot archive the existing listing and publish a new easier version like you could in your tree climbing example.

 

I feel like my personal experience with this cache is a good example of the limitations on your intent. I arrived at sunrise and took a Webcam photo; I did all that was technically required for logging and have a Find. But I never saw the sunrise. I would have watched it, but it was extremely cloudy that morning and the sunrise was completely obscured.

 

I sympathize with the OP's intent - the desire for a cache to give seekers an experience. But it will only ever work some of the time. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. You can't force someone to stop and enjoy a scenic overlook or care about the history on a historical marker. Tree climbs routinely involve one cacher climbing on behalf of 4 others standing on the ground watching.

 

My personal recommendation is keep the cache active, but strongly encourage visitors to come at sunrise. Some still will do so.

 

Also, please stop allowing non-Webcam photos under any circumstances. :)

Link to comment

It's really your fault for letting some slip through the cracks. You should have either applied the rule to all or none. You didn't properly maintain your own cache.

 

Correct. Which I have admitted and me "fixing" this is what caused this whole mess.

 

Bear in mind, no one ever notified me when this rule change went into effect in 2009. I wasn't scrutinizing the photos people were posting, because it never occurred to me that people wouldn't follow the simple directions. I am not sure how a few of you are not understanding this.

 

Once I realize what was happening, I took steps to correct it. I understand there are a few more logs in there now that shouldn't be (per my rules), but it's clear that these are within GS's rules (right?), so I am notsure why anyone would be advising me to delete them now...? If they are allowed, they are allowed, right?

 

If you had been enforcing your rules all along, you would have found out about the GS rule change a long time ago, and in the same way you just did find out about it. A cacher who knows the rules would have complained about you breaking GS rules.

 

Ok... so what is the point you are making? That we should have had this conversation 6 years ago? Well, unfortunately my time machine cache was archived, so that's not going to happen. How about if we focus on the present?

 

If you are saying it is my fault that that me deleting logs that didn't meet the requirement ended up leading to a cacher reporting the cache to GS (regardless of what year that happened), then I agree with you. If you are trying to make some other point, I'm missing it.

 

I should have trimmed your post. Part of your rant is that the ALR rule has not caught up with you until now. You recently started enforcing your ALR, and now all of a sudden it's a problem. The reality is that many people may have noticed it. But because you were not enforcing it, nobody cared, because it was as if you didn't have the rule.

 

Now you effectively change the rules by enforcing a (long ago diallowed) rule that you have not enforced for years, and it bothers you that people complain.

 

Wow.

Edited by AustinMN
Link to comment

This thread could have been soooo much more positive had the OP refrained from the crying baby comments. Nevertheless, it could still be more positive if others would ignore those crying baby comments and focus on the webcam and the ALR instead of the baby comments.

 

I could also have gone much better if some of the responses were not "I know you are but what am I" baby comments.

 

Personally, I'd like to thank the OP for creating and maintaining a web cam cache for 11 years.

 

 

Link to comment

This thread could have been soooo much more positive had the OP refrained from the crying baby comments. Nevertheless, it could still be more positive if others would ignore those crying baby comments and focus on the webcam and the ALR instead of the baby comments.

I'm not sure if the irony of your comment was intentional, but I found it quite amusing, so I'm going to pretend it was.

 

And I agree with your point. Ignoring whining and focusing on problems is always a good idea, not just on-line in forums.

 

Personally, I'd like to thank the OP for creating and maintaining a web cam cache for 11 years.

Hear, hear.

Link to comment

Personally, I'd like to thank the OP for creating and maintaining a web cam cache for 11 years.

 

I think much of the debate is about the fact that apparently the OP has NOT been maintaining it since he is only now trying to enforce the ALR.

And... they weren't aware of the change that had happened years ago. It was a shock to find out and they posted the rant before doing some research. I understand that. I've been there too.

Link to comment

I'm not going to respond insult by insult... but man, some of you guys are just too much. LOL. I love the whining about whining about whining infinite loop. Let's definitely argue about who the biggest baby is. Yeah.....

 

I do apologize if my initial rant was a little harsh, but I was frustrated. If you have never been frustrated and complained about something before, you are a better person than I.

 

And you're right, I'm not the world's greatest geocacher, nor do I aspire to be. I was very active in this game for a while (a decade ago), but my interest waned as the game changed and became more about numbers and P&Gs than about journeys and experiences. That said, I did my best to keep a lot of my hides active and well maintained to the best of my ability. If I was somehow inconsistent in enforcing this cache's ALR over the course of 11 years and that offends you, I am sorry. Scrutinizing years worth of logs looking for inconsistencies in 15 minutes is a lot different than doing so over the course of 11 years. I'm not making excuses, just admitting that things slipped through the cracks. Maintaining this cache has not been the the most important thing in my life for the past 11 years. I was in my 20s when I place it and I'm in my 40s now. I've been single, married, had multiple jobs, started a couple of different companies, been rich and poor, and lived in 3 different houses in that time. Maintaining this cache has not always been of utmost importance to me.

 

I don't know why this offends some of you so deeply, but it is what it is.

 

Despite whatever you think about my competence as a CO and the appropriateness of the cry-baby accusations in my OP, my frustration in this whole ordeal remains. I don't like that that rules were changed mid-game and am frankly surprised that so many people seem to be totally fine with that. I doubt you'd be ok with that during a hand of poker. Changing rules for the betterment of the game *going forward* is fine, but "grandfathering" exists for a reason.

 

And my other frustration was in how this whole thing was handled by the GCer I called out... running straight to GS to report my cache as a violation of their updates rules, rather than contacting me and explaining the situation and making his case. He's sent me several insulting email and even updated his now-reinstated log with a fake sunrise photo titled, "RISE AND SHINE PUMPKIN!!!" Classy guy.

 

None of this matters now though. I do thank those of you who made positive comments in this thread (not only the people who were "on my side," but there were several constructive posts from the other side as well, instead of just finger pointing and letting me know how terribly in the wrong I am).

 

I was hoping GS would reconsider, but it's been a few days and they haven't replied to my email. I entertained the thought of making the "requirement" optional, but that's just not the same to me. I'm ok with compromising, but not when it defeats the entire purpose of my cache. Yeah, getting people to see the sunrise over the ocean was the important part to me - not how they took the photo. I understand some of you don't feel the same way, but that's how I feel, and that's why this cache is now archived.

 

For those of you who mentioned really wanting to visit this cache site at sunrise someday, I hope that you will. I look forward to seeing your logs.

 

Happy hunting.

Link to comment

I'm not going to respond insult by insult... but man, some of you guys are just too much. LOL. I love the whining about whining about whining infinite loop. Let's definitely argue about who the biggest baby is. Yeah.....

 

I do apologize if my initial rant was a little harsh, but I was frustrated. If you have never been frustrated and complained about something before, you are a better person than I.

 

And you're right, I'm not the world's greatest geocacher, nor do I aspire to be. I was very active in this game for a while (a decade ago), but my interest waned as the game changed and became more about numbers and P&Gs than about journeys and experiences. That said, I did my best to keep a lot of my hides active and well maintained to the best of my ability. If I was somehow inconsistent in enforcing this cache's ALR over the course of 11 years and that offends you, I am sorry. Scrutinizing years worth of logs looking for inconsistencies in 15 minutes is a lot different than doing so over the course of 11 years. I'm not making excuses, just admitting that things slipped through the cracks. Maintaining this cache has not been the the most important thing in my life for the past 11 years. I was in my 20s when I place it and I'm in my 40s now. I've been single, married, had multiple jobs, started a couple of different companies, been rich and poor, and lived in 3 different houses in that time. Maintaining this cache has not always been of utmost importance to me.

 

I don't know why this offends some of you so deeply, but it is what it is.

 

Despite whatever you think about my competence as a CO and the appropriateness of the cry-baby accusations in my OP, my frustration in this whole ordeal remains. I don't like that that rules were changed mid-game and am frankly surprised that so many people seem to be totally fine with that. I doubt you'd be ok with that during a hand of poker. Changing rules for the betterment of the game *going forward* is fine, but "grandfathering" exists for a reason.

 

And my other frustration was in how this whole thing was handled by the GCer I called out... running straight to GS to report my cache as a violation of their updates rules, rather than contacting me and explaining the situation and making his case. He's sent me several insulting email and even updated his now-reinstated log with a fake sunrise photo titled, "RISE AND SHINE PUMPKIN!!!" Classy guy.

 

None of this matters now though. I do thank those of you who made positive comments in this thread (not only the people who were "on my side," but there were several constructive posts from the other side as well, instead of just finger pointing and letting me know how terribly in the wrong I am).

 

I was hoping GS would reconsider, but it's been a few days and they haven't replied to my email. I entertained the thought of making the "requirement" optional, but that's just not the same to me. I'm ok with compromising, but not when it defeats the entire purpose of my cache. Yeah, getting people to see the sunrise over the ocean was the important part to me - not how they took the photo. I understand some of you don't feel the same way, but that's how I feel, and that's why this cache is now archived.

 

For those of you who mentioned really wanting to visit this cache site at sunrise someday, I hope that you will. I look forward to seeing your logs.

 

Happy hunting.

 

I think you did the right thing for you by archiving the cache because it was getting on your nerves.

 

I also think you posted your rant because you thought the community would be outraged with the loss of a webcam, but really they are not that big of a deal anymore. I remember when the one in DC was archived a few months ago, it was listed by another person a few days later on another geocache listing service. Webcams are very much still alive, just not here. :ph34r:

Link to comment
I entertained the thought of making the "requirement" optional, but that's just not the same to me. I'm ok with compromising, but not when it defeats the entire purpose of my cache. Yeah, getting people to see the sunrise over the ocean was the important part to me - not how they took the photo. I understand some of you don't feel the same way, but that's how I feel, and that's why this cache is now archived.
If it's any consolation, you aren't alone. When Groundspeak changed the guidelines several years ago to make all Additional Logging Requirements optional, some cache owners just made their ALRs optional and left the cache otherwise intact. Others considered the ALR to be the point of the cache, or considered the cache to be "not the same cache" with an optional ALR, and they archived their caches.
Link to comment

Hmmmmmm... Not sure how I can say this...but this borderline of being a controlling CO of how the cache should be found. Thats not the sprint of geocaching.

 

One less controlling cache for us to find. Thank you so much for shutting it down. dry.gif

 

I will say this again, being a CO isnt for everyone.

Hey there pig. Don't have a heart attack, but I pretty much agree with you on this one. :)

Link to comment

And you're right, I'm not the world's greatest geocacher, nor do I aspire to be. I was very active in this game for a while (a decade ago), but my interest waned as the game changed and became more about numbers and P&Gs than about journeys and experiences. That said, I did my best to keep a lot of my hides active and well maintained to the best of my ability. If I was somehow inconsistent in enforcing this cache's ALR over the course of 11 years and that offends you, I am sorry. Scrutinizing years worth of logs looking for inconsistencies in 15 minutes is a lot different than doing so over the course of 11 years. I'm not making excuses, just admitting that things slipped through the cracks. Maintaining this cache has not been the the most important thing in my life for the past 11 years. I was in my 20s when I place it and I'm in my 40s now. I've been single, married, had multiple jobs, started a couple of different companies, been rich and poor, and lived in 3 different houses in that time. Maintaining this cache has not always been of utmost importance to me.

 

Which would be understandable...except for the fact that we're talking, what...170 logs over how many years now? So maybe 11 or 12 per year? Hardly a full-time job. If even that small amount of attention isn't worth your time, it's best that it's archived now.

 

It doesn't "offend" us. You just won't really find much sympathy.

Link to comment

Wow, folks are sure piling it on here. Well, it is an internet forum. For what it is worth I sympathize with the CO. I see his situation as analogous to many others that are frustrating for COs, such as when people cheat to get puzzle cache coordinates, or find ways to skip out on multi cache stages by finding spoilers. As a CO who creates some involved cache hunts, it is very disheartening to learn that some cachers will skip all the fun of the cache experience you have created just to get a smiley. I haven't ever thought about archiving my cache because of this, but I know some COs who do, especially for spoiled puzzles. The fact that the guidelines allow for any cache find to stand as long as some basic requirements are met, like signing the log, or in the OPs case, using the webcam, means that there is little a CO can do about this. Except, try to figure out ways to create better caches, puzzles and experiences. So I sympathize with the OP. In the end though, those few instances that have bothered me pale in comparison to the great logs I get from people who do experience my caches the way they are meant to be experienced. This positive far outweighs any frustrations I may get from the odd "cheater".

 

Come to think of it, completing all the stages of a multi, finishing a Wherigo cartridge, solving a puzzle... all these things are in a sense ALR. If a cacher finds and signs the final, it doesn't matter if they did what you intended them to do. I'm probably guilty of this at some point too.

Link to comment

I, too, sympathize with the CO, primarily because of the behavior of the other cacher. What about the "sense of community" we're supposed to strive for? I could be way off base here, but I'm sorta betting that if that honked off cacher had contacted the CO directly and politely rather than rushing to GS to "tattle" on the CO, that things could have been resolved amicably and the cache would still be there.

 

I know my first action if I have a problem - almot any problem - with a cache or a CO's action, is to contact the CO and see if we can iron things out cacher to cacher. And you can tell the other cacher has an attitude "issue" here by the title of his pic in his reinstated log and (assumption here) by the fact that GS felt the need to edit his reinstated log.

 

While the CO may have had a knee jerk reaction, the onus of bad behavior is on the other cacher, IMO. YMMV

 

Mrs. Car54

Link to comment

I agree with the CO as well. While I don't care for webcams (they don't seem like geocaching to me), having a sunrise requirement doesn't seem any different from solving puzzles, doing so many caches in a day, having to do the cache at night, waiting until a facility opens to get to the cache inside, waiting until spring to do a backcountry cache, etc. It's just one more variation on a theme. In fact, I think this sunrise requirement makes even a webcam cache kind of cool.

Link to comment
Come to think of it, completing all the stages of a multi, finishing a Wherigo cartridge, solving a puzzle... all these things are in a sense ALR. If a cacher finds and signs the final, it doesn't matter if they did what you intended them to do.
Well, now that all ALR are considered optional, I suppose yes, they are similar. It doesn't matter if you completed all the stages of a multi, finished a Wherigo cartridge, solved a puzzle, completed an InterCache program, wrote your log in iambic pentameter, posted a photo of yourself standing on your head, or whatever else. If you signed the physical log, then your find stands.
Link to comment

I, too, sympathize with the CO, primarily because of the behavior of the other cacher. What about the "sense of community" we're supposed to strive for? I could be way off base here, but I'm sorta betting that if that honked off cacher had contacted the CO directly and politely rather than rushing to GS to "tattle" on the CO, that things could have been resolved amicably and the cache would still be there.

 

I know my first action if I have a problem - almot any problem - with a cache or a CO's action, is to contact the CO and see if we can iron things out cacher to cacher. And you can tell the other cacher has an attitude "issue" here by the title of his pic in his reinstated log and (assumption here) by the fact that GS felt the need to edit his reinstated log.

 

While the CO may have had a knee jerk reaction, the onus of bad behavior is on the other cacher, IMO. YMMV

 

Mrs. Car54

 

I think it is best to contact GS and let them enforce their guidelines than for two geocachers to hash it out with rude emails to eachother. Seems it started a geofeud between the two, and calling out another member here in the forums and calling them cry baby and other names is in bad form, IMO. :anibad:

Link to comment

Another point--the one who actually contacted GS was someone who had a log deleted from 3 months ago. I try to keep careful track of my 11 EarthCaches, but I would not delete a log that old if I let it slide by through my own carelessness. The oldest log I've ever deleted is a month old, and that's only when the person doesn't respond to emails.

Link to comment

Bottom line is that Groundspeak agreed with the person that complained. Now it is up to you to adjust your listing to comply with the guidelines or archive it. Myself, I would just update my listing to comply to currant guidelines or ask someone else to take over ownership.

 

I was informed that webcams can not be transferred to other COs. I guess (my own speculation) the idea is to get them to all die off eventually.

 

One of my big pet peeves. If Groundspeak wants to lock all new webcams and virtuals its one thing, but owners cant even change their coordinates, enable their cache, or transfer ownership. Just ensures they die quicker. The only way webcams will continue after COs pass away is family members taking over the account.

 

That is just my opinion about webcams and virtuals in general, not about the reason this webcam got archived. Personally I hate to see any webcam go, especially with an active CO and a functional webcam, wish you could have made the sunrise request optional.

Link to comment

Bottom line is that Groundspeak agreed with the person that complained. Now it is up to you to adjust your listing to comply with the guidelines or archive it. Myself, I would just update my listing to comply to currant guidelines or ask someone else to take over ownership.

 

I was informed that webcams can not be transferred to other COs. I guess (my own speculation) the idea is to get them to all die off eventually.

 

One of my big pet peeves. If Groundspeak wants to lock all new webcams and virtuals its one thing, but owners cant even change their coordinates, enable their cache, or transfer ownership. Just ensures they die quicker. The only way webcams will continue after COs pass away is family members taking over the account.

 

That is just my opinion about webcams and virtuals in general, not about the reason this webcam got archived. Personally I hate to see any webcam go, especially with an active CO and a functional webcam, wish you could have made the sunrise request optional.

 

I don't understand why people think that webcams and virtuals are no longer allowed by Groundspeak. That is why they created the Waymarking site and moved them there. :unsure:

Link to comment

I think it is best to contact GS and let them enforce their guidelines than for two geocachers to hash it out with rude emails to eachother.

If my neighbour is having a party and there is so much noise so that I can't sleep, I'll go over and ask them to turn the volume down. That usually works just fine and is not breeding bad blood. Calling the police immediatly because they are breaking the law does.

Link to comment

I think it is best to contact GS and let them enforce their guidelines than for two geocachers to hash it out with rude emails to eachother.

If my neighbour is having a party and there is so much noise so that I can't sleep, I'll go over and ask them to turn the volume down. That usually works just fine and is not breeding bad blood. Calling the police immediatly because they are breaking the law does.

 

That really dosen't make much sense to me, comparing that to a geocacher on vacation logging a webcam. :o

Link to comment

I think it is best to contact GS and let them enforce their guidelines than for two geocachers to hash it out with rude emails to eachother.

If my neighbour is having a party and there is so much noise so that I can't sleep, I'll go over and ask them to turn the volume down. That usually works just fine and is not breeding bad blood. Calling the police immediatly because they are breaking the law does.

 

That really dosen't make much sense to me, comparing that to a geocacher on vacation logging a webcam. :o

What I was trying to say is that I would first try to resolve my issues with the person causing them before I involve authorities. Sorry if that was unclear.

Link to comment

I think it is best to contact GS and let them enforce their guidelines than for two geocachers to hash it out with rude emails to eachother.

If my neighbour is having a party and there is so much noise so that I can't sleep, I'll go over and ask them to turn the volume down. That usually works just fine and is not breeding bad blood. Calling the police immediatly because they are breaking the law does.

 

That really dosen't make much sense to me, comparing that to a geocacher on vacation logging a webcam. :o

What I was trying to say is that I would first try to resolve my issues with the person causing them before I involve authorities. Sorry if that was unclear.

 

Either way, the CO was not willing to cooperate, even with GS's advise. I think once that GS made the decision to allow the finders log to stand because of the ALR issue the CO just got mad and felt the ALR rules do not apply to them and if they are forced to abide by the same rules as the rest of us, Webcam ownership is no longer for them. :)

Link to comment

The fact is, once we got smart phones and could do webcams ourselves, they were never going to be the same experience they once were. I did do one in Virginia last fall that we could not do on our smartphones--we just couldn't make the site work. A friend on a computer in another state finally got it to work after a half-hour or more. It was raining, of course! Ah--now that must have been just like the old days! That said--I've only logged working webcams. If a webcam is down, I don't log it. The minimum requirement for a webcam cache must be using the webcam!

Link to comment

 

I don't understand why people think that webcams and virtuals are no longer allowed by Groundspeak. That is why they created the Waymarking site and moved them there. :unsure:

 

We know they are not allowed anymore for new publishes, but they are still active caches, it would be nice if COs could do basic cache maintenance on them afforded to the other caches, like changing the coordinates 100 feet or transferring ownership or even temping the cache if there is a problem and then being able to enable it afterwards.

Link to comment

 

I don't understand why people think that webcams and virtuals are no longer allowed by Groundspeak. That is why they created the Waymarking site and moved them there. :unsure:

 

We know they are not allowed anymore for new publishes, but they are still active caches, it would be nice if COs could do basic cache maintenance on them afforded to the other caches, like changing the coordinates 100 feet or transferring ownership or even temping the cache if there is a problem and then being able to enable it afterwards.

 

This is all starting to make sense to me that Webcams are a problem for GS to deal with like Challenge caches. Too many complaints that they have to resolve between geocachers, unlike webcams on the Waymarking site where they are "policed" by the owners and GS will not intervein. :ph34r:

Link to comment

 

I don't understand why people think that webcams and virtuals are no longer allowed by Groundspeak. That is why they created the Waymarking site and moved them there. :unsure:

 

We know they are not allowed anymore for new publishes, but they are still active caches, it would be nice if COs could do basic cache maintenance on them afforded to the other caches, like changing the coordinates 100 feet or transferring ownership or even temping the cache if there is a problem and then being able to enable it afterwards.

 

This is all starting to make sense to me that Webcams are a problem for GS to deal with like Challenge caches. Too many complaints that they have to resolve between geocachers, unlike webcams on the Waymarking site where they are "policed" by the owners and GS will not intervein. :ph34r:

 

Thats why I dont play it... too many controlling Waymarking owners. If G$ allowed CO to be controlling, geocaching today will be dead. Its deleted logs that make finders what to quit.

 

Its the controlling people that send virtual, webcam, Locationless, Challenge caches, and ALR caches to their grave (or a very painful death) It almost killed earthcache... but I should they should because I know some pretty controlling earthcache owners out there. They are NOT fun.

 

Geocaching is about having FUN...not finding out a controlling CO deleted your found it log because you didnt do it like he/she want you to do it.

 

Deleting logs = hurt G$ bottom line long term.

 

If any of you are controlling cache owners, you arent welcome here. You are no fun. You are taking the game way too serious. I go geocaching to relax and have fun and get away from my busy life. When I find out someone deleted my found it log because I made a very tiny mistake of not reading the cache page right or the CO wasnt very clear of how to find his/her caches, it makes me want to quit. Do GS want people to quit over deleted logs? I dont think so.

 

GS is doing a pretty good job of controlling those controlling CO.

Link to comment

Interesting...there is one 2013 log that was deleted in 2015 and then a bunch of 2015 logs that were deleted in 2015, followed by three deleted "commentary" notes. What changed in 2015?

 

Folks are correct about the ALR allowance going away in 2009, but there are still caches with ALRs because they haven't been corrected by the Cache Owner and because someone hasn't brought it to the local Reviewer's or Groundspeak's attention. Had I, as a Reviewer, come across the cache after 2009, I would have asked that the sunrise requirement be made optional.

 

I also review EarthCaches. I don't seek out photo requirements, but when I see one, I request the Cache Owner to make the photo optional.

Link to comment

Interesting...there is one 2013 log that was deleted in 2015 and then a bunch of 2015 logs that were deleted in 2015, followed by three deleted "commentary" notes. What changed in 2015?

 

Folks are correct about the ALR allowance going away in 2009, but there are still caches with ALRs because they haven't been corrected by the Cache Owner and because someone hasn't brought it to the local Reviewer's or Groundspeak's attention. Had I, as a Reviewer, come across the cache after 2009, I would have asked that the sunrise requirement be made optional.

 

I also review EarthCaches. I don't seek out photo requirements, but when I see one, I request the Cache Owner to make the photo optional.

 

Someone gave an inch and few went a mile. :lol:

Link to comment

I was informed that webcams can not be transferred to other COs. I guess (my own speculation) the idea is to get them to all die off eventually.

...Just ensures they die quicker.

 

I think that is the idea. Not that they die off "quicker" but that they eventually go to archive heaven rather than be kept alive forever and I don't disagree with that concept.

 

The gift from "grandfather" seems to get lost in these discussions. It has allowed everyone, new to the game or oldtimer, to get in on the virtual and webcam action while it lasts.

Link to comment

If any of you are controlling cache owners, you arent welcome here. You are no fun. You are taking the game way too serious. I go geocaching to relax and have fun and get away from my busy life. When I find out someone deleted my found it log because I made a very tiny mistake of not reading the cache page right or the CO wasnt very clear of how to find his/her caches, it makes me want to quit. Do GS want people to quit over deleted logs? I dont think so.

This argument seems a bit one-sided to me. If the point of geocaching is to have fun and to get outside, then why be upset if a 'Found It' log is deleted? The CO's placed and maintained (usually) the caches for you to find. If a cache seeker can't bother to abide by the cache description, which the CO also spent time creating, then what's so egregious about the CO deleting the cache seeker's log? There are certainly cases where some CO's might be over-the-top in their requirements, like if an EC owner deletes a log because a cacher estimates a distance of 200ft instead of 250ft - but if the CO requests the year from a plaque be emailed to them (Virtuals) or that a webcam be pointing in a specific direction, then I'm not sure I'd call that 'controlling'. Those are not over-the-top requests.

Link to comment

 

I have multi and mystery caches where people just go to the cache without visiting the stages or solving the puzzle, because complete databases with end coordinates etc. are exchanged over here.

 

Complete different discussion. Solving the puzzle is not a logging requirement and never has been.

 

Sentence taken out of context. It was not meant as an example of a logging requirement, it was meant as an example of how things have changed, how geocaching has changed, how geocachers don't care about a CO's intentions with a cache but only care about their "rights" to log.

Link to comment

Well, I am bummed to see it go. Thanks for keeping it alive for so long.

 

When I read that the OP decided to archive that webcam I checked to see if there were others nearby. It looks like there is another web cam about 22 miles away at Pt. Canaveral that is "found" frequently. At least for those living in or visiting that area have another option if they want to do a web cam.

 

There are only 3 remaining webcams in the entire state of New York. I've done one of them. If the closest webcam to where I lived (about 75 miles) were archived the next closest is 135 miles away.

 

One less webcam might not be an issue in some places but if there was one less webcam in a place like, for example, Italy, there would be no web cams at all in the entire country

 

 

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 8
×
×
  • Create New...