Jump to content

GPSr ONLY Caches


mollypix
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

Over the past several years, since the introduction of the Mobile App, Geocaching has changed. The Mobile App has allowed more people into the game, and in someways got out of hand.

 

The App does enchorage new players, and new players have different ideas on how this game should be played.

 

This is taking the fun out of the game.

 

1. Less accurate placement of caches.

2. More DNF's when the cache is actually there.

 

For those who are more committed to the game, we spend many dollars on a GPSr, and learn to use it.

 

I1. I'd like to see an attribute that allows the cache to be viewed on the website and not in an App.

 

2. A selection Box to show what instrument was used to place the cache.

Link to comment

Over the past several years, since the introduction of the Mobile App, Geocaching has changed. The Mobile App has allowed more people into the game, and in someways got out of hand.

 

The App does enchorage new players, and new players have different ideas on how this game should be played.

 

This is taking the fun out of the game.

 

1. Less accurate placement of caches.

2. More DNF's when the cache is actually there.

 

For those who are more committed to the game, we spend many dollars on a GPSr, and learn to use it.

 

I1. I'd like to see an attribute that allows the cache to be viewed on the website and not in an App.

 

2. A selection Box to show what instrument was used to place the cache.

 

My droid is just as accurate as my Garmin, and it cost waaay more. :o

Link to comment

My Samsung Galaxy S5 is just as accurate as my Oregon 450. $600 for the phone vs. $250 for the GPSr. Like so many things involving technology, the USER is usually the issue. Cache placers that believe their gps will give them accurate coordinates within 15 seconds of arrival at GZ of their new cache placement are just as ignorant as those who believe that a phone's gps is not accurate.

 

Knowing how to use a tool is more important that the age or type of the tool.

Link to comment

I'm not starting a My GPSr is more Accurate than your Mobile Phone Discussion.

 

I just don't want some of my caches appearing on the App that's all. Just like Premium and Non Premium.

 

So the why wouldn't you want them on the app? The phone is a thing that everybody has access to. Where I live, the economy is not as great as it was. Not everybody is willing to spend $200 for a GPS after they got laid off and took a job making half as much, but still paying the same bills. But they can use the phone they already own.

 

When I started caching, people where using their car GPS units to cache.

 

Now even if you give a perfect argument, and they do li it this, then how are they going to stop access to cgeo? It's not argue official app, and it gets its information directly form the website, so what's available on the website, is available on that app.

 

And also, that would just be making more work for those that cache with a phone. They'll just go to the website, via the phones Web browser, copy the co-ords, and past them in either the Groundspeak app (like they would for a puzzle) or any other geocaching, or GPS apps out there.

Link to comment

Basic members using the official Intro Apps can only see low-difficulty, low-terrain traditional caches that are not PMO caches. In a sense, the OP's requested filter is already in place. To take advantage of it, a CO can hide caches with higher difficulty and/or terrain ratings, or make their listings viewable by premium members only.

 

Once someone pays $30 for a premium membership, they can see all the caches. Can the OP explain the difference between spending hundreds of dollars on a GPS plus a $30 premium membership versus spending hundreds of dollars on a smartphone plus a $30 premium membership?

Link to comment

I would just like to see the OLD methods of geocaching enchoraged, not lost to modern technology.

 

If your out of Mobile Range, your Mobile Phone wont help you find a Geocache there.

How is using the GPS in a smartphone different from using a GPS in a handheld unit or the GPS in a car GPS? They all use the same satellites and technology.

Link to comment

I would just like to see the OLD methods of geocaching enchoraged, not lost to modern technology.

 

If your out of Mobile Range, your Mobile Phone wont help you find a Geocache there.

 

The old methods? So a gps where we have to put in the co-ords one number at a time, and printing out each cache page?

 

And no, that's not true. The smartphones only require an Internet connection to connect to the online databases. Just like any handheld gps it can store that info offline. Most (if not all) new phones have gps chips in them. It's not really a big deal anymore, a gps chip probably adds as much to the cost as the packaging. Some mobile devices even have GLONASS. So all of that mean is that when looking for a cache on a remote mountain, I just downloaded the via wifi instead of a USB cable, and that I only need my phone, not my phone ipod camera gps and gameboy.

 

 

You are just blaming all of the issues you've seen on the app, even though it's the users that are to blame. Why not something to help the newbs become better cachers? By not allowing them to see all this good stuff, you're not giving them any reason to be better, so they'll continue to do all this bad stuff.

Link to comment

I think you're approaching the problem the wrong way. If you want to make your caches available to a select crowd, you need to find those situations that either encourage a handheld GPS or discourage people using their smartphone. I'm thinking something like a climbing cache or a scuba cache. You don't need a new feature, you just need to step up your game :anibad:

Link to comment
I would just like to see the OLD methods of geocaching enchoraged, not lost to modern technology.
Here you go:

Geocaching.com Presents: “Geocaching Without GPS”

 

I found hundreds of caches using maps and satellite images before finally buying a GPS receiver.

 

If your out of Mobile Range, your Mobile Phone wont help you find a Geocache there.
Nonsense. I've used my phone for geocaching when I've had no cell/data signal. Sometimes I even turn off the cell/data antenna when the cell/data signal is unreliable, to force the phone to stop trying to connect to distant antennas when I don't need the connection in the first place.

 

The GPS system in the phone works fine without a cell/data signal.

 

And as a practical matter, once I've downloaded a PQ, how is the system supposed to know whether I'm putting the GPX file on a phone or on a dedicated GPS receiver? Or do you want to force people to go back to entering coordinates by hand?

 

Oh, and touch-screen GPS receivers make it much too easy to enter coordinates by hand, so we shouldn't allow them either, right?

Link to comment

I'm glad you enjoy entering cache coordinates one at a time by scrolling through numbers using the dicky joystick thing, because I don't. I've had 2 GPSr's and I wasn't impressed with either of them, an explorist something with a proprietary charging cable that could be connected either way so I could never simply charge it and an etrex that was..... crud.

My phone, an S5, is worth more than either of those units. It is more durable than either of those units. It is easier to use than either of those units AND I always have it on me, I don't have to remember to bring it along, or load it up or print pages. It works perfectly fine away from reception, just save the caches I want to an offline list. Christ, I've cached 2 hours away from reception and it's still taken me straight to GZ. I've placed by of my caches with my phone and never had a complaint about coordinates.

 

As for DNF's, they happen and they are exactly as they are named. The player Did Not Find the cache, that's it.

Link to comment

To me the Game is getting out of hand, too many players, too many concepts on the way it should be played.

 

Some cachers have put out a replacement cache, when they can't find the original cache. Simply they haven't looked hard enough.

 

This ruins the game. A cache is placed by the owner as a challenge to others to go and find it, not cheat, and put out another cache and claim the find.

 

The reason I would like this new attribute is to keep the game the way it should be played.

 

Too many players, too many concepts.

Link to comment

 

The reason I would like this new attribute is to keep the game the way it should be played.

 

Would CO's make use of this attribute? Maybe not. I wouldn't.

Would smartphone users pay attention to this attribute? Probably not.

 

The way the game is played is find the cache, sign the log, log online. If someone is going to do a throwdown an attribute is not going to stop them.

Link to comment

To me the Game is getting out of hand, too many players, too many concepts on the way it should be played.

 

Some cachers have put out a replacement cache, when they can't find the original cache. Simply they haven't looked hard enough.

 

This ruins the game. A cache is placed by the owner as a challenge to others to go and find it, not cheat, and put out another cache and claim the find.

 

The reason I would like this new attribute is to keep the game the way it should be played.

 

Too many players, too many concepts.

 

So the answer there is to educate players where you can about the etiquette that goes along with playing the game and lead by example. The fact of the matter is that the various apps the pull data from Groundspeak are here to stay and i don't see any reason why i should be disadvantaged for using my phone when i am already paying Groundspeak every year AND forked out for the app.

I'd suggest that if you are concerned about

Possible negative effects on caches from the popularity of the game then concentrate on higher terrain, higher difficulty and GCA caches. All of which are going to naturally attract less traffic to them.

Link to comment

To me the Game is getting out of hand, too many players, too many concepts on the way it should be played.

 

Some cachers have put out a replacement cache, when they can't find the original cache. Simply they haven't looked hard enough.

 

This ruins the game. A cache is placed by the owner as a challenge to others to go and find it, not cheat, and put out another cache and claim the find.

 

The reason I would like this new attribute is to keep the game the way it should be played.

 

Too many players, too many concepts.

Odd that in this area, throwdowns are often done by long-time cachers who cache mainly with a GPSr.

- Though those same cachers also have a phone (and app) with them now too...

We've had an app on a phone since a short time after starting (anyone else remember blackberry and trimble?).

'05 I think it was. :)

Link to comment

How is using the GPS in a smartphone different from using a GPS in a handheld unit or the GPS in a car GPS? They all use the same satellites and technology.

... ah, but not the same software. Unless something has changed, the 'official' gc.com apps still don't support what we recommend for 'best practice' when placing a cache. With any purpose built handheld, we recommend two or more trips using the WAYPOINT AVERAGING feature of the handheld. Even if done poorly, it assures that the CO has remained on site long enough to get a half decent set of coordinates and can help to avoid some really poor 'snapshot' coordinates that are often seen otherwise. Granted, there are probably a lot of people out there who don't use that feature on their purpose built handheld, either, but at least it's THERE to be used.
Link to comment

How is using the GPS in a smartphone different from using a GPS in a handheld unit or the GPS in a car GPS? They all use the same satellites and technology.

... ah, but not the same software. Unless something has changed, the 'official' gc.com apps still don't support what we recommend for 'best practice' when placing a cache. With any purpose built handheld, we recommend two or more trips using the WAYPOINT AVERAGING feature of the handheld. Even if done poorly, it assures that the CO has remained on site long enough to get a half decent set of coordinates and can help to avoid some really poor 'snapshot' coordinates that are often seen otherwise. Granted, there are probably a lot of people out there who don't use that feature on their purpose built handheld, either, but at least it's THERE to be used.

 

As a note, is there to use on the phone too. Type 'gps average' into the relevant app store and dozens of them come up.

Link to comment
Some cachers have put out a replacement cache, when they can't find the original cache. Simply they haven't looked hard enough.

 

This ruins the game. A cache is placed by the owner as a challenge to others to go and find it, not cheat, and put out another cache and claim the find.

 

The reason I would like this new attribute is to keep the game the way it should be played.

It sounds like what you really want is a No Throwdowns attribute. Or maybe a rule against throwdowns.

 

But I wouldn't expect attributes like that to change anyone's behavior.

Link to comment
Some cachers have put out a replacement cache, when they can't find the original cache. Simply they haven't looked hard enough.

 

This ruins the game. A cache is placed by the owner as a challenge to others to go and find it, not cheat, and put out another cache and claim the find.

 

The reason I would like this new attribute is to keep the game the way it should be played.

It sounds like what you really want is a No Throwdowns attribute. Or maybe a rule against throwdowns.

 

An interesting idea, but one that would never see the light of day.

 

Currently the guidelines only stipulate that you can log cache online once the physical log is signed. Essentially, that means that if the physical log does not contain the "finders" signature that the CO may delete the find. With a bit of a change in the language it could allow a CO to delete the log on a cache if the "finder" didn't sign the log sheet in the container hidden by the CO.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment

With a bit of a change in the language it could allow a CO to delete the log on a cache if the "finder" didn't sign the log sheet in the container hidden by the CO.

 

I think I already have that authority without a language change.

 

As the owner of your cache listing, your responsibility includes quality control of all posts to the cache listing. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate.

 

Bogus is defined as "not genuine or true". If people aren't signing the logbook or logsheet that I placed, it doesn't ring very genuine or true to me. The alternative is for everyone to carry around a piece of paper in their pocket with their signature on it, and take a picture of it at GZ. No need to carry around multiple replacement containers.

Link to comment

It sounds like what you really want is a No Throwdowns attribute. Or maybe a rule against throwdowns.

 

I would like to see a No Throwdowns policy that a cache will be reviewer disabled if a throwdown is reported, then archived if there is no Owner Maintenance log indicating that the owner checked the cache to confirm it is in good order.

 

I'm seeing way more throwdowns in the last 2 years, and a mindset that it's what good geocachers do.

 

Found this wonderful 2010 hide and yes, the cache is in rough shape. What a shame a maintenance note has been placed on a cache that no longer has an active CO. This 2010 hide will end up being archived and lost forever. It's too bad I didn't know about it sooner - I would've been more than happy to replace the container.

The cache is a plastic shoebox container, no gasket, a 2x3" hole on one end. The CO hasn't logged in since 2011. It's in a ditch by a road, next to a sewage plant.

2.png Found it

Being a good geocacher and seeing that this LPC had been Muggled and not found in months, I pulled a Spare cache from my Geo bag and replaced it with a new one

 

Could not find the original either. Replaced it with a throwdown duplicate we found at another cache. TFTC

 

Didn't realise this had been archived, so when I found it had gone I replaced it with a small bison of my own
Link to comment

It sounds like what you really want is a No Throwdowns attribute. Or maybe a rule against throwdowns.

 

I would like to see a No Throwdowns policy that a cache will be reviewer disabled if a throwdown is reported, then archived if there is no Owner Maintenance log indicating that the owner checked the cache to confirm it is in good order.

 

I'm seeing way more throwdowns in the last 2 years, and a mindset that it's what good geocachers do.

 

snip...

 

Could not find the original either. Replaced it with a throwdown duplicate we found at another cache. TFTC

 

 

Ya gotta love it. They recognize a throwdown from another location, take it, then use it as a throwdown later. Wow.

 

I do like the idea of archiving caches with obvious throwdowns. To make that happen, we need to get cachers better trained on spotting these (logs make that really easy), and then marking them NM/NA to get the reviewers attention.

 

Skye.

Link to comment

As a note, is there to use on the phone too. Type 'gps average' into the relevant app store and dozens of them come up.

It's hard enough to get owners to use waypoint averaging when it's INTRINSIC to a device or phone app. Asking them to find a 3rd party app and use it as asking too much, especially for those who aren't aware of the concept to begin with, much less its usefulness. It's a feature that should be part of the official gc.com app and recommended by them for placements.
Link to comment

To me the Game is getting out of hand, too many players, too many concepts on the way it should be played.

The Game has become popular. It's only "out of hand" in relation to your specific approach.

 

Some cachers have put out a replacement cache, when they can't find the original cache. Simply they haven't looked hard enough.

You see newbies doing this? In my experience, although newbies aren't always clear on the difference between "I can't find it" and "It's not there", I don't recall any newbies with the chutzpah to drop a throwdown.

 

This ruins the game. A cache is placed by the owner as a challenge to others to go and find it, not cheat, and put out another cache and claim the find.

What?! You think throwdowns ruin the game? You must run into a lot more throwdowns then I do. To me, they're a very minor and entirely ignoreable nuisance.

 

The reason I would like this new attribute is to keep the game the way it should be played.

Oh, well, then that's easy, then, because you attribute would not do one thing to reduce the problems you're talking about. It wouldn't even have the effect that you really intend but don't state: to discourage more people from taking up geocaching.

 

Too many players, too many concepts.

Too many players having trouble with the game expanding beyond how they play it.

Link to comment

I use a caching app to locate, filter, manage, and track caches I might want to find. If I want to use the handheld gpsr, I export a GPX file from the app to it. So I suppose I would fall through the cracks if the OP's proposal was adopted.

 

Its not so much the tools that are used, but how the tools are used that is important.

Link to comment

With a bit of a change in the language it could allow a CO to delete the log on a cache if the "finder" didn't sign the log sheet in the container hidden by the CO.

 

I think I already have that authority without a language change.

 

As the owner of your cache listing, your responsibility includes quality control of all posts to the cache listing. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate.

 

Bogus is defined as "not genuine or true". If people aren't signing the logbook or logsheet that I placed, it doesn't ring very genuine or true to me. The alternative is for everyone to carry around a piece of paper in their pocket with their signature on it, and take a picture of it at GZ. No need to carry around multiple replacement containers.

 

That might be a dictionary definition but in the context of geocaching, if someone unknowingly signed a log sheet in a throwdown container, and it went to appeals I'm not so sure that GS would consider it to be a "bogus" log.

 

GS has taken a stance on virtual logging and archived caches when a CO allowed photo logs for an extended period of time or some other bogus log (e.g. the Four Windows Virtual) but I don't think I've ever seen anyone post here with a complaint that their log on a throwdown was deleted and GS supported the draconian decision by a CO to delete it.

 

The whole "you may log the cache online if the physical log is signed" seems to be frequently stretched by finders.

 

Is a log "bogus" if someone stood at the base of a tree while someone else climbed the tree, located the container, then wrote someone both names on the log sheet. In a case where someone did nothing to help find the container, never touched it, and certainly didn't find it as the CO intented, but can still log it as found because their name is on the log sheet, doesn't sound very "genuine" to me.

Is a log considered "bogus" if someone becomes part of an adhoc team, but drives other geocachers (which actually go out and locate the container and stamp the log sheet with team name) around all day.

Are logs considered bogus when a team splits up into separate vehicles and leaps frogs caches or goes off different directions and then all the members of the team log all of the caches found that day?

Are logs sign/stamp using the container swapping strategy employed on some power trails bogus. After all, they're not signing the log sheet in the container that the CO place at GZ for a specific cache listing.

To me, those types of logs are far more bogus then a cacher that goes out, find a container at GZ, signs the log sheet and is unaware that the container was placed by someone other than the CO.

 

 

 

Link to comment

With a bit of a change in the language it could allow a CO to delete the log on a cache if the "finder" didn't sign the log sheet in the container hidden by the CO.

 

I think I already have that authority without a language change.

 

As the owner of your cache listing, your responsibility includes quality control of all posts to the cache listing. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate.

 

Bogus is defined as "not genuine or true". If people aren't signing the logbook or logsheet that I placed, it doesn't ring very genuine or true to me. The alternative is for everyone to carry around a piece of paper in their pocket with their signature on it, and take a picture of it at GZ. No need to carry around multiple replacement containers.

 

That might be a dictionary definition but in the context of geocaching, if someone unknowingly signed a log sheet in a throwdown container, and it went to appeals I'm not so sure that GS would consider it to be a "bogus" log.

 

GS has taken a stance on virtual logging and archived caches when a CO allowed photo logs for an extended period of time or some other bogus log (e.g. the Four Windows Virtual) but I don't think I've ever seen anyone post here with a complaint that their log on a throwdown was deleted and GS supported the draconian decision by a CO to delete it.

 

The whole "you may log the cache online if the physical log is signed" seems to be frequently stretched by finders.

 

Is a log "bogus" if someone stood at the base of a tree while someone else climbed the tree, located the container, then wrote someone both names on the log sheet. In a case where someone did nothing to help find the container, never touched it, and certainly didn't find it as the CO intented, but can still log it as found because their name is on the log sheet, doesn't sound very "genuine" to me.

Is a log considered "bogus" if someone becomes part of an adhoc team, but drives other geocachers (which actually go out and locate the container and stamp the log sheet with team name) around all day.

Are logs considered bogus when a team splits up into separate vehicles and leaps frogs caches or goes off different directions and then all the members of the team log all of the caches found that day?

Are logs sign/stamp using the container swapping strategy employed on some power trails bogus. After all, they're not signing the log sheet in the container that the CO place at GZ for a specific cache listing.

To me, those types of logs are far more bogus then a cacher that goes out, find a container at GZ, signs the log sheet and is unaware that the container was placed by someone other than the CO.

I don't spend a great deal of time contemplating the meaning of bogus as it relates to signing my name on a piece of paper. If I did, I would probably cache with a Notary in tow. My point was merely to point out that the Guidelines address this issue sufficiently. I'm not a big fan of continuing to expand on the Guidelines to the point they read like a Terms of Use Agreement.

Link to comment

I think what resolves the issue is PMO caches. I moved some over after getting this log:

Needs Archived Nothing is in the little magnetic box just paper for id and paper is filled with names so there is no room for anymore names

Yes. It is an MKH, but there were still 40 lines for signatures.

I may move the rest of my caches over to PMO. Nah. Just the easy ones. If a cacher is going to hike a mile, or solve a puzzle, the cache is not likely to get such logs.

One local, prolific CO moved all of his to PMO. That seems to have resolved his problems with newbies.

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 3
×
×
  • Create New...