Jump to content

"Please confirm my calculated coordinates..."


-CJ-

Recommended Posts

With this question I'd like to get more understanding of the atmosphere within the community. It's about when anyone asks you to confirm the calculated coordinates of your puzzle.

 

I've always felt myself a bit awkward answering such requests. In my opinion, finding a puzzle cache is a whole process. a) I think, B) I work out some versions, c) I choose the best one and d) I go to check this version and find the pirate's chest. This is what makes puzzles interesting. If I could call a pirate or send him an email message and ask him politely to confirm my calculations before going anywhere this would kill the very idea of treasure hunting.

 

On the other hand, with this approach a puzzle cache splits into two parts: home-made calculations and a traditional hide. There's not much sense in a puzzle then I think. Actually, the puzzle can be anything with no relation to any particular cache. I solve the riddle, I send my answer to the cache owner, and if my solution is correct I get coordinates from him to go and grab the container.

 

Currently there are hundreds (if not thousands) of caches with geochecker functionality so geocachers can verify their calculations without going outdoors. I know COs who are absolutely comfortable with this practice. Are there COs who share my discomfort about answering questions like that? If yes, how do you usually respond so people don't feel ignored/offended?

Link to comment

Some other things for you to consider:

 

1. You're assuming that going to search at the wrong coordinates is a harmless activity. That is, the wrong coordinates lead you to a deserted forest glen, or dead-end road, or something like that. Consider the possibility that the wrong coordinates could end up putting a searcher into someone's front yard, a dangerous part of an urban setting, a muggle-infested area with lots of hostile neighbors, and so on. Suddenly, looking in the wrong place for a container that isn't there isn't quite as nice an activity as it might seem.

2. Not verifying coordinates (either manually or through an automated checker) means that you're going to get a lot more DNFs. You, as cache owner, won't be able to tell the difference between someone who logs a DNF because they solved the puzzle incorrectly, and someone who logs a DNF because they couldn't find the container at the correct coordinates. Cache containers do go missing from time to time; you'll need to make a point of checking on that container yourself perhaps more frequently than you might otherwise.

Having said all of that ... it's your puzzle cache, and you're free to construct your puzzle listing any way that you please.

Link to comment

Some other things for you to consider:

 

1. You're assuming that going to search at the wrong coordinates is a harmless activity. That is, the wrong coordinates lead you to a deserted forest glen, or dead-end road, or something like that. Consider the possibility that the wrong coordinates could end up putting a searcher into someone's front yard, a dangerous part of an urban setting, a muggle-infested area with lots of hostile neighbors, and so on. Suddenly, looking in the wrong place for a container that isn't there isn't quite as nice an activity as it might seem.

2. Not verifying coordinates (either manually or through an automated checker) means that you're going to get a lot more DNFs. You, as cache owner, won't be able to tell the difference between someone who logs a DNF because they solved the puzzle incorrectly, and someone who logs a DNF because they couldn't find the container at the correct coordinates. Cache containers do go missing from time to time; you'll need to make a point of checking on that container yourself perhaps more frequently than you might otherwise.

Having said all of that ... it's your puzzle cache, and you're free to construct your puzzle listing any way that you please.

 

1. The onus is always on you to use your best judgment and not go into a place that seems sketchy or off-limits. Blaming the cache owner for your own lack of judgment is not reasonable. Barbed wire? No trespassing? Someone's yard? Reconsider your puzzle solution.

 

2. Not all DNFs are created equal. A cache owner who creates a challenging puzzle knows that detailed DNFs from trusted geocachers should be taken more seriously than DNFs from unknowns.

Link to comment

1. The onus is always on you to use your best judgment and not go into a place that seems sketchy or off-limits. Blaming the cache owner for your own lack of judgment is not reasonable. Barbed wire? No trespassing? Someone's yard? Reconsider your puzzle solution.

 

Which sounds great in theory. Coordinates put you in someone's front yard and the puzzle description says "it's on private property with permission"? Okay, how do you know you're on the right person's property?

 

Yes, the cacher is always responsible for their own safety and their own actions. I'm simply pointing out that looking around for a cache at the wrong coordinates is a slightly bigger deal than it might seem.

 

2. Not all DNFs are created equal. A cache owner who creates a challenging puzzle knows that detailed DNFs from trusted geocachers should be taken more seriously than DNFs from unknowns.

 

Agreed --- if you even get the DNFs at all. Some folks won't even bother attempting them. Which is fine; everyone plays the game the way they choose.

 

The cache owner is free to construct the cache listing without coordinate verification; the consequence will probably be that fewer cachers will find the cache. Whether that's acceptable (or desireable?) is up to the cache owner.

 

 

Link to comment

With this question I'd like to get more understanding of the atmosphere within the community. It's about when anyone asks you to confirm the calculated coordinates of your puzzle.

 

I've always felt myself a bit awkward answering such requests. In my opinion, finding a puzzle cache is a whole process. a) I think, B) I work out some versions, c) I choose the best one and d) I go to check this version and find the pirate's chest. This is what makes puzzles interesting. If I could call a pirate or send him an email message and ask him politely to confirm my calculations before going anywhere this would kill the very idea of treasure hunting.

 

On the other hand, with this approach a puzzle cache splits into two parts: home-made calculations and a traditional hide. There's not much sense in a puzzle then I think. Actually, the puzzle can be anything with no relation to any particular cache. I solve the riddle, I send my answer to the cache owner, and if my solution is correct I get coordinates from him to go and grab the container.

 

Currently there are hundreds (if not thousands) of caches with geochecker functionality so geocachers can verify their calculations without going outdoors. I know COs who are absolutely comfortable with this practice. Are there COs who share my discomfort about answering questions like that? If yes, how do you usually respond so people don't feel ignored/offended?

 

My main concern is that I only get these emails from people who are genuinely trying to solve something on their own, so I don't want to spoil it entirely, nor do I want to discourage them from finding it.

Link to comment

My main concern is that I only get these emails from people who are genuinely trying to solve something on their own, so I don't want to spoil it entirely, nor do I want to discourage them from finding it.

 

+1

 

I have a variety of reasons for not using checkers for some of my puzzles, but I never refuse to verify coordinates when asked.

 

If the coordinates are wrong, I can usually tell why and I additionally offer a hint to help the solver go in the right direction.

 

For me as a puzzle creator, the joy comes from people successfully solving the puzzle. It's not some kind of me vs. them competition, but at the same time there is no fun for either me or the seeker if I just give them the solution.

 

It requires (*gasp*) some judgment and common sense on my part.

Link to comment

For me, if solving the puzzle follows a clear process and the result is a definitive set of coordinates, I generally see no need for a checker.

If the puzzle has a degree of...fuzziness?...built into the method of solving it, then I will provide a checker just for the searcher's peace of mind (and will confirm a solution if asked).

 

Way I look at it, once they have solved the puzzle to obtain coordinates, the cache then basically becomes a traditional at that point. They have coordinates, now they have to find the hidden container. I have no interest in drawing out the mystery into the "am I even in the right place?" territory.

Edited by J Grouchy
Link to comment

When someone bothers to ask the CO to validate the coordinates, I would imagine they'd spent reasonable amount of effort to have the coordinates and found some uncertainty (e.g., more than one valid answers, conflicting resource, and so on). I welcome such questions as I could potentially improve the puzzle by removing the ambiguity, so I'm happy to work with them to see how they got wrong numbers (if any). But more importantly, I want people to enjoy the experience, and I personally don't see it as fun to search for something that doesn't even exist.

Link to comment

I've always felt myself a bit awkward answering such requests.

I gather you mean you're awkward denying such requests since I can't imagine you feeling awkward if you're going to answer the question.

 

In my opinion, finding a puzzle cache is a whole process.

I understand that, and I have no problem with you refusing to confirm anyone's answers. I think it would work out better to say that up front in the description, since in that context it's just quaint, but if I only find out when you refuse to answer, you'll seem like a hard a**.

 

Having said that, I much prefer having my answer confirmed. There are two cases. The first is a puzzle that I can't really be sure I've solved until I go to that location and see if there's a cache there. I've got plenty of caches to choose from, so instead of wasting time checking each possibility, I'd likely just forget about such a puzzle unless I happened to be at that location for other reasons.

 

The other case is a puzzle that I can tell I've solved since it is sufficiently well designed that I couldn't possibly have gotten such a reasonable answer with an incorrect approach. In this case, confirmation isn't really about the puzzle, it's about me: did I make some minor mistake on a digit or two? A problem like that just results in frustration without having redeeming feature. Confirming the answer avoids that problem.

 

So, yes, I prefer taking puzzles on in two stages. Without confirmation, I'm always wondering if I'm looking in the right place, so my search is likely to be superficial. If I can't find it right away, my first thought will be that my answer is wrong, not that the hide is more clever than I expected.

 

Just to let you know, in my area, puzzle caches are almost never published without a geochecker these days.

Link to comment

Just to let you know, in my area, puzzle caches are almost never published without a geochecker these days.

I see the same around here. Typically the only puzzles that don't have a checker are ones where you can only come up with one possibility, like decoding text that spells out numerical words. If you're doing the puzzle wrong, you won't come up with any coordinates at all, so there's no need for any confirmation of a correct answer in those cases.

Link to comment

I'm with fizzymagic about 98%. There have been one or two puzzles I've created over the years where I have said I won't confirm the coordinates. Those were in the very early days (2002 - 2004) when coordinate checkers weren't available (or I didn't know of any). My main reasons were to avoid a lot of pestering emails or because I made clear that if you have to ask, then you haven't solved it because the aha moment is so clear. Now I put coordinate checkers on all my puzzles or at least a checksum. Sometimes the checker is built-in, but I still get requests. For example, I have some crossword puzzle caches. The application I use has a message that pops up if the puzzle is solved correctly and of course I put the full correct coords in that message, yet I still get people emailing me saying they solved the puzzle correctly but still didn't get the message so could I check their crossword solution. Of course they didn't solve the puzzle correctly which is why the coords didn't pop up. I won't give them the coordinates or the completed puzzle, but I will tell them what section of the puzzle has the problem and usually a strong hint, like "The clue says 'robbers' plural. Is Highwayman plural?"

 

Bear in mind, though, that if it hasn't yet been solved, or only solved once or twice, I will look very closely at such a request, even when I have a checker (or especially if I have a checker) because I've been known to have errors or unintentional ambiguities or red herrings in my puzzles. I may ask the requester how he/she came up with those coordinates and want to find those and correct them if they exist. Sometimes in cases like that I'll confirm half the coordinates (N or W but not both). Bear in mind that if you don't help someone asking at least a little, they will probably start asking other solvers and just get a spoiler answer or full coordinates, so it's better to help them with the puzzle if they have it wrong.

Edited by The Rat
Link to comment

We have a cacher near me that has made a number of puzzles that rely on aviation/navigation calculations, as well as basic physics. On several of his, a variation of 0.001 can result in drastically different answers...or something missed in the equation that someone unfamiliar with aviation would likely not know about. He never links a geochecker, so I have often found myself resorting to emailing him for confirmation. In most cases I am close enough to be able to search, but my answers have varied wildly from his "official" answers - anywhere from 15 to 150 feet. I think in such cases, a checker tool is often inadequate.

 

But I explain my methods and he sees a reasonable effort...so when I get close he will usually help guide me along or provide "official" coordinates if I'm close enough.

Link to comment

My main concern is that I only get these emails from people who are genuinely trying to solve something on their own, so I don't want to spoil it entirely, nor do I want to discourage them from finding it.

 

+1

 

I have a variety of reasons for not using checkers for some of my puzzles, but I never refuse to verify coordinates when asked.

 

If the coordinates are wrong, I can usually tell why and I additionally offer a hint to help the solver go in the right direction.

 

For me as a puzzle creator, the joy comes from people successfully solving the puzzle. It's not some kind of me vs. them competition, but at the same time there is no fun for either me or the seeker if I just give them the solution.

 

It requires (*gasp*) some judgment and common sense on my part.

 

+1

Link to comment

I would pass on searching for a puzzle if the solution is ambiguous and there wasn't a way to verify my solution, either with a coordinate checker or manual verification with the owner. I almost prefer owner verification, since then there is now way to brute force the checker.

 

I once found a difficult puzzle where the puzzle was wrong and looking for the cache would have been a really big issue. The puzzle coordinates placed the cache inside a locked and fenced in yard behind a highway patrol/maintenance office. And yes, the cache page said placed on private property with permission. If the owner for that had just put up a wall and said "I don't confirm coordinates," then that cache would probably still be waiting for a FTF.

 

If someone asks for confirmation, I will confirm the coordinates or give them a small push in the correct direction.

Edited by ChaosWarning
Link to comment

Thank you for sharing your opinions.

 

Are there any people around here who think that solving puzzles is better (for any reasons) to be done from beginning to the end without confirmation of coordinates? If yes and if you own puzzles yourself please share your way of communication with other people.

Link to comment

Typically the only puzzles that don't have a checker are ones where you can only come up with one possibility, like decoding text that spells out numerical words. If you're doing the puzzle wrong, you won't come up with any coordinates at all, so there's no need for any confirmation of a correct answer in those cases.

I know that line of thought, but I don't agree with it. There are any number of things I can do wrong with even the most obvious answer, so I always appreciate a checker since it not only confirms I solved the puzzle correctly, but it also ensures I transcribed the answer correctly.

 

Thank you for sharing your opinions.

 

Are there any people around here who think that solving puzzles is better (for any reasons) to be done from beginning to the end without confirmation of coordinates? If yes and if you own puzzles yourself please share your way of communication with other people.

Naturally it depends on the puzzle. There's nothing inherently wrong with making the only confirmation being finding the cache, but there are negative aspects of that approach that need to be handled carefully or too many people won't have fun.

Link to comment

my two cents, I suck at puzzles (and I really mean I suck) and I will try to solve them, but if I need a little help or that I have solved the puzzle correctly... I will email the CO and ask, failing that I Will ask another finder, not everyone is good at puzzles and if a CO didnt reply, I would find them rude, I always help or give them a hint if someone asks on mine

Link to comment

My experience with this is I believe I correctly solved the puzzle based on others descriptions of the area. However it's in a pay to visit park. I have to budget EVERY dollar I have. I mean every one. So I asked to verify because if I'm wrong I won't be able to arrange to check again for about a month, also the money I budgeted for gas and the entry fee could have been used for food. I sent my reason for wanting a verification before looking for the cache. I didn't ask for the corrected cords or anything, just a yes or no. They never responded and so I sadly I will never be able to try for that one in the foreseeable future. I understand their viewpoint but I wish cache owners would state that they will not confirm cords on the cache page. I spent 2 days solving the puzzle and I'm now making sure to only do puzzle caches with the checkers on the page or ones that state you can verify with the CO.

Link to comment

Dear Marisa&kaleb, it's not about hints. If anyone asks me for a small hint to my puzzle cache I'm usually happy to help. What I'm suggesting to talk about here is when someone asks to confirm his final solution = the answer.

 

As for having/not having fun: I've always considered geocaching as a treasure hunting game with no guarantees. One can find a cache or fail. Using the same example, when I go for treasures I don't email the old pirate in advance to confirm my ideas. It's both a challenge and fun to try to find a cache without preliminary verification. I see that some people don't agree with this but probably there are others.

Edited by -CJ-
Link to comment

As for having/not having fun: I've always considered geocaching as a treasure hunting game with no guarantees. One can find a cache or fail. Using the same example, when I go for treasures I don't email the old pirate in advance to confirm my ideas. It's both a challenge and fun to try to find a cache without preliminary verification. I see that some people don't agree with this but probably there are others.

Yeah, but the problem is that there's another treasure just down the street at a known location, so there's no particular point in spending time digging five places because the pirate map was vague.

 

Again, though, I'm just speaking generally. I have no problem with you not confirming answers (even with ambiguous answers) if that's what you want to do. I might ask for confirmation, but I myself won't be put off if you refuse to give it. I'm kinda unusual in that I'm there for the walk, anyway. (Although remember that I'll blame you for that obnoxious bushwhack up a steep hill to an incorrect answer, so if it happens too often, I'll likely stop looking at your puzzles.)

Link to comment

Yeah, but the problem is that there's another treasure just down the street at a known location, so there's no particular point in spending time digging five places because the pirate map was vague.

 

This is exactly why it isn't a problem. There's always another cache to find. Some caches only appeal to a niche group and that's cool.

Link to comment

Myself, I prefer to have geocheckers. I have them on all the puzzles I own. I appreciate them on puzzles I solve. Lack of a geochecker won't deter me from solving and looking for a puzzle cache though.

 

Of course there are some which don't need one. If it is a cipher which when solved spells out the coordinates, it is unlikely I could come up with a wrong solution.

 

I understand that having the act of finding it in the field being the thing that confirms the puzzle was solved can make that more exciting. But mainly as I'm a rubbish finder, I prefer to know I'm looking in the right place. Otherwise I DNF not knowing if I had the puzzle wrong or just can't find it.

 

I recall one puzzle cache where I came up with 3 different solutions which made sense to me and pointed to a feasible location. I had 3 DNFs, all my solutions were wrong. My 4th answer was the correct one.

Link to comment

This is exactly why it isn't a problem. There's always another cache to find. Some caches only appeal to a niche group and that's cool.

 

True. I see no problem if anyone doesn't choose my puzzle cache because he doesn't use to go outdoors without verification of coordinates. There are many traditional caches to search for.

Link to comment

One thing you might sacrifice with your approach is out-of-towners. I'm not saying I'd avoid your puzzles if I lived in your neck of the woods, but if I was on a long trip and simply swinging through your area, I would avoid them knowing that I might not get it right the first time like I would with confirmed coordinates.

Link to comment

This is exactly why it isn't a problem. There's always another cache to find. Some caches only appeal to a niche group and that's cool.

 

True. I see no problem if anyone doesn't choose my puzzle cache because he doesn't use to go outdoors without verification of coordinates. There are many traditional caches to search for.

 

In many regards I see it as a positive if a cache deters lots of finders. I would rather have 1 good log from someone who put effort into the cache than 100 "TFTC" logs from people who are just racking up numbers.

Link to comment

One thing you might sacrifice with your approach is out-of-towners. I'm not saying I'd avoid your puzzles if I lived in your neck of the woods, but if I was on a long trip and simply swinging through your area, I would avoid them knowing that I might not get it right the first time like I would with confirmed coordinates.

 

This category of geocachers isn't a target group at all when we talk about difficult puzzle caches.

Link to comment

This is exactly why it isn't a problem. There's always another cache to find. Some caches only appeal to a niche group and that's cool.

True. I see no problem if anyone doesn't choose my puzzle cache because he doesn't use to go outdoors without verification of coordinates. There are many traditional caches to search for.

I've said myself there's no problem. But the statement about pirates suggested there was something special about looking for the treasure in multiple spots, and my point was that there's nothing special about it at all, it's just extra make-work.

 

In many regards I see it as a positive if a cache deters lots of finders. I would rather have 1 good log from someone who put effort into the cache than 100 "TFTC" logs from people who are just racking up numbers.

I see no reason to think people that had to look 5 places before finding the right coordinates would write better logs than someone that knew they had the right coordinates the first place they looked. It's not as if there's anything clever about multiple possible solutions.

Link to comment

I like checkers.

I don't have to wait for an answer from the CO.

I don't have to waste gas going to the wrong location

I like seeing Homer dance it makes me feel good I solved the puzzle correctly

I like how you can hide the hint in the checker instead of the hint section.

Link to comment

I've said myself there's no problem. But the statement about pirates suggested there was something special about looking for the treasure in multiple spots, and my point was that there's nothing special about it at all, it's just extra make-work.

 

What's special for a certain group of people (not for everyone) is the surprise aspect and the greater joy when one finally finds the treasure - it keeps the suspense until the moment of find (the same is true for new complex caches which have not been betatested). Note that this is not tied to situations where a homework puzzle has several possible solutions. It also relates to fields puzzles like e.g. interpreting a cryptic poem correctly (one might first try wrong ideas before having the correct one and in the field the design idea is to explore them and not to apply checkers and often there would nothing to be checked anyway as not always the result are coordinates in a multi stage setting.

 

Also when it comes to homework puzzles the result are not necessarily coordinates - the task could be to find a certain object or a location from where one has a particular view and once that task has been completed there are further tasks that then lead to coordinates for a container or next location. In such cases I would not answer requests whether the object is near place X as there that's the idea of the cache to go there and see yourself and certainly no trespassing and other issues can happen. Of course such caches are not designed for non local cachers who do not have a lot of time but not every cache needs to be for everyone and I welcome caches that only appeal to locals.

 

I see no reason to think people that had to look 5 places before finding the right coordinates would write better logs than someone that knew they had the right coordinates the first place they looked. It's not as if there's anything clever about multiple possible solutions.

 

See what I wrote above. The comment was certainly not about a Sudoku with 5 different solutions, but rather a general comment.

 

In my opinion, there are just different types of cachers and there are many for whom caching is about ending up with guaranteed smilies - if they fail they regard it as waste of time and gas and those cachers should accept that are cache hiders out there who are not hiding caches for this target audience.

Link to comment

My experience with this is I believe I correctly solved the puzzle based on others descriptions of the area. However it's in a pay to visit park. I have to budget EVERY dollar I have. I mean every one. So I asked to verify because if I'm wrong I won't be able to arrange to check again for about a month, also the money I budgeted for gas and the entry fee could have been used for food. I sent my reason for wanting a verification before looking for the cache. I didn't ask for the corrected cords or anything, just a yes or no. They never responded and so I sadly I will never be able to try for that one in the foreseeable future. I understand their viewpoint but I wish cache owners would state that they will not confirm cords on the cache page. I spent 2 days solving the puzzle and I'm now making sure to only do puzzle caches with the checkers on the page or ones that state you can verify with the CO.

 

If the CO can't be bothered to answer a simple confirmation of the coordinates with a yes or no I would be tempted to send a message to one of the previous finders asking it they got the same coordinates as you did when you solved the puzzle.

 

 

Link to comment

This is exactly why it isn't a problem. There's always another cache to find. Some caches only appeal to a niche group and that's cool.

True. I see no problem if anyone doesn't choose my puzzle cache because he doesn't use to go outdoors without verification of coordinates. There are many traditional caches to search for.

I've said myself there's no problem. But the statement about pirates suggested there was something special about looking for the treasure in multiple spots, and my point was that there's nothing special about it at all, it's just extra make-work.

 

In many regards I see it as a positive if a cache deters lots of finders. I would rather have 1 good log from someone who put effort into the cache than 100 "TFTC" logs from people who are just racking up numbers.

I see no reason to think people that had to look 5 places before finding the right coordinates would write better logs than someone that knew they had the right coordinates the first place they looked. It's not as if there's anything clever about multiple possible solutions.

 

And, back to my actual point, I see no reason to think that a cache that I would enjoy won't appeal to a few other geocachers as well, or that a cache is only worth putting out if it appeals to the vast majority.

Link to comment

But the statement about pirates suggested there was something special about looking for the treasure in multiple spots, and my point was that there's nothing special about it at all, it's just extra make-work.

 

Well, you say it's extra make-work, I say it can be part of the game. Both approaches work in geocaching AFAIK. The problem is that sometimes people who used to rely on verification feel offended when being refused in a most polite manner. I want to know why (and I can already make some conclusions from responses to my topic here). Another goal is to find people who aren't happy confirming coordinates for their puzzles and find out what words/illustrations/hyperlinks they use in communications with a disappointed cacher who doesn't want to do "extra make-work".

Link to comment

Well, you say it's extra make-work, I say it can be part of the game. Both approaches work in geocaching AFAIK. The problem is that sometimes people who used to rely on verification feel offended when being refused in a most polite manner. I want to know why (and I can already make some conclusions from responses to my topic here). Another goal is to find people who aren't happy confirming coordinates for their puzzles and find out what words/illustrations/hyperlinks they use in communications with a disappointed cacher who doesn't want to do "extra make-work".

 

Why reply at all? If you don't reply, you can't say anything that will cause offense.

Link to comment

Well, you say it's extra make-work, I say it can be part of the game. Both approaches work in geocaching AFAIK. The problem is that sometimes people who used to rely on verification feel offended when being refused in a most polite manner. I want to know why (and I can already make some conclusions from responses to my topic here). Another goal is to find people who aren't happy confirming coordinates for their puzzles and find out what words/illustrations/hyperlinks they use in communications with a disappointed cacher who doesn't want to do "extra make-work".

 

Why reply at all? If you don't reply, you can't say anything that will cause offense.

 

Not replying at all when one is able to reply is impolite in my opinion.

Explaining why in a particular setting one is not willing to provide what the inquiring person asks for is something else.

 

The problem is just that many cachers nowadays feel entitled to get whatever they want to get (be it a permission to log a find when they did not find the cache, be it a lot of help for a cache they never would be able to solve in their own, be it whatever else) and if the cache owner does not provide them with what they want to have they continue with asking others. There is no respect for the wishes of the cache owner - in cases where there is no log book signature at least the cache owner can react by log deletion but in most other cases there is no reasonable way for the cache owner to react.

Link to comment

One thing you might sacrifice with your approach is out-of-towners. I'm not saying I'd avoid your puzzles if I lived in your neck of the woods, but if I was on a long trip and simply swinging through your area, I would avoid them knowing that I might not get it right the first time like I would with confirmed coordinates.

This category of geocachers isn't a target group at all when we talk about difficult puzzle caches.

Except now that we have challenge caches. Out of towners may well travel great distances for difficult caches.

 

Not replying at all when one is able to reply is impolite in my opinion.

Only if they find out you intentionally didn't reply :) In a way, it's presumptuous - they have no way of knowing if you missed the message/email, or forgot about it. I think in that case the onus could go either way. Nonetheless, not answering could be 'safer' than answering and denying, if you're sure that the latter would cause great angst.

 

However, as mentioned a few times, if the person asking doesn't feel they got the info they were hoping for (confirmation, hint, whatever) they may well move on to checking with past finders and get more than you'd hope they get (like complete solutions/spoilers). So it's really up to you as the CO how much you want to divulge and what you fele the risk is that they'll go "under the table" to get the info you wouldn't give.

 

For me, if solving the puzzle follows a clear process and the result is a definitive set of coordinates, I generally see no need for a checker.

If the puzzle has a degree of...fuzziness?...built into the method of solving it, then I will provide a checker just for the searcher's peace of mind (and will confirm a solution if asked).

 

Way I look at it, once they have solved the puzzle to obtain coordinates, the cache then basically becomes a traditional at that point. They have coordinates, now they have to find the hidden container. I have no interest in drawing out the mystery into the "am I even in the right place?" territory.

Ditto all this.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

Well, you say it's extra make-work, I say it can be part of the game.

 

Have you ever tried to send an explanation specific to the concerned cache? If you just write that it is part of the game might cause an issue as geocaching means different things to different people and there are many cachers out there who do not consider geocaching as a treasure hunt and so if you use the explanation via the pirate example it will not be something that these people will appreciate.

 

I do not have a general recommendation for you - I just think that adding some sentences to a cache description on what to expect/and on the target audience might help. You will always end up however with visitors that do not belong to your target audience.

Link to comment

Except now that we have challenge caches. Out of towners may well travel great distances for difficult caches.

 

Not so much in Russia and there is a difference between a difficult puzzle that is turned into a traditional once solved and the sort of difficult caches -CJ- has in mind that require a lot of time

once in the target area.

 

Only if they find out you intentionally didn't reply :) In a way, it's presumptuous - they have no way of knowing if you missed the message/email, or forgot about it. I think in that case the onus could go either way. Nonetheless, not answering could be 'safer' than answering and denying, if you're sure that the latter would cause great angst.

 

At least if I reply these cachers know that the cache owner is not appreciating if they get want they want from somewhere else and the reason for this.

Suppose e.g. your first task is to find a certain graffiti in a town. If you have a conjecture you can easily check it by visiting your target location - the more lazy way is of course asking "Is this area right?". In such cases if I owned such a cache I would reply with "Go out and have a look yourself" and that's also what I would do myself (by bicycle or public transportation - so not using any gas at all).

 

Way I look at it, once they have solved the puzzle to obtain coordinates, the cache then basically becomes a traditional at that point. They have coordinates, now they have to find the hidden container. I have no interest in drawing out the mystery into the "am I even in the right place?" territory.

Ditto all this.

 

That's only true for single stage puzzle cache - there are much more complex set ups and also cases where the first result are not coordinates.

Personally, I find most puzzle caches that turn into traditionals pretty boring.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

I see no reason to think people that had to look 5 places before finding the right coordinates would write better logs than someone that knew they had the right coordinates the first place they looked. It's not as if there's anything clever about multiple possible solutions.

See what I wrote above. The comment was certainly not about a Sudoku with 5 different solutions, but rather a general comment.

Well, yes, but I still contest that your general comment applies in this context.

 

In my opinion, there are just different types of cachers and there are many for whom caching is about ending up with guaranteed smilies - if they fail they regard it as waste of time and gas and those cachers should accept that are cache hiders out there who are not hiding caches for this target audience.

And, back to my actual point, I see no reason to think that a cache that I would enjoy won't appeal to a few other geocachers as well, or that a cache is only worth putting out if it appeals to the vast majority.

You guys seem intent on presenting the possibility of a decent puzzle being designed that way, and I don't contest that. But my reading of the OP was that not confirming makes sense in general, so I consider the case of two puzzles that are the same in all respects except that, for one, there's a good chance I'll end up looking for the cache in some difficult to reach location, not of the CO's design, even though the cache is somewhere else. While I might enjoy that experience (depending on what my random answer was), I still say the puzzle with the final at a known location is the better one when all else is equal.

Link to comment

Except now that we have challenge caches. Out of towners may well travel great distances for difficult caches.

Not so much in Russia and there is a difference between a difficult puzzle that is turned into a traditional once solved and the sort of difficult caches -CJ- has in mind that require a lot of time once in the target area.

..I don't think the latter is what CJ was referring to at all. The context was simply whether confirming puzzle solution coordinates as correct is something good to do. Whether it's one stage or multiple is really irrelevant - if it's multiple, then the question simply becomes would you do it for the first set? Second? Last? Any/all of them?

 

The way I read CJ's question is whether one considers the puzzle and cachehunt as the entire experience, or if the puzzle is one task and the cachehunt is a separate one.

And the thread has some great examples of both situations, as well as reasons why people may prefer one and/or the other. I don't think anyone's saying there's a right/wrong here, but there are some great experiences to take into consideration when deciding whether to include a geochecker on your puzzle (or multi) or how to respond to requests for confirmation (regardless of how many stages a cache may be, Unknown or Multi or Letterbox, or how much work is involved if one has incorrect unconfirmed coordinates) plus any potential side effects :)

 

Letterboxes are a little different as a traditional Letterbox (ie not at the posted coordinates) would included non-GPS tasks in order to locate the container; so that's not so much about confirming coordinates as confirming that the person has done the right thing or is in the right area.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

Except now that we have challenge caches. Out of towners may well travel great distances for difficult caches.

Not so much in Russia and there is a difference between a difficult puzzle that is turned into a traditional once solved and the sort of difficult caches -CJ- has in mind that require a lot of time once in the target area.

..I don't think the latter is what CJ was referring to at all. The context was simply whether confirming puzzle solution coordinates as correct is something good to do. Whether it's one stage or multiple is really irrelevant - if it's multiple, then the question simply becomes would you do it for the first set? Second? Last? Any/all of them?

 

What I meant was more something like: CJ's puzzles are typically fields puzzles and not puzzles to be solved at home. This is a cache type not of the type that is turned into a traditional at home.

 

 

Letterboxes are a little different as a traditional Letterbox (ie not at the posted coordinates) would included non-GPS tasks in order to locate the container; so that's not so much about confirming coordinates as confirming that the person has done the right thing or is in the right area.

 

A lot of multi caches and mystery caches (and also some wherigos) I know involve such elements as well and that was one of the aspects I tried to address.

The guidelines just require that a cache involves one GPS task not that all tasks need to be GPS tasks.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment
Why reply at all? If you don't reply, you can't say anything that will cause offense

 

As it was said, not replying at all may seem rude. My case is a bit different because I've done much (and hope to do more) to welcome geocachers who come from abroad to hunt in our nice rural area. So people often send me messages about meet-and-greet events, I organize small walking tours, share ideas about caches in Moscow, etc. It's common. Not answering to anyone may really seem rude and I don't want this.

 

Have you ever tried to send an explanation specific to the concerned cache?

 

No. I don't think this would be a good idea.

 

Not so much in Russia

 

True.

 

The way I read CJ's question is whether one considers the puzzle and cachehunt as the entire experience, or if the puzzle is one task and the cachehunt is a separate one.

 

Good point but this wasn't exactly my question. I understand that there are two approaches. The question was more about experience that COs of the "first type" have in communications with visitors of their caches who asked for verification.

Link to comment

What I meant was more something like: CJ's puzzles are typically fields puzzles and not puzzles to be solved at home. This is a cache type not of the type that is turned into a traditional at home.

I didn't get field puzzles from the OP at all.

The "field" aspect was about taking extra trips seeking out what may be incorrect coordinates. I wouldn't call that a "field puzzle", if it were a planned by the CO, but more a "potential field task" in order to verify if a solution is right or wrong. Whether that's acceptable/enjoyable or not depends on the finder as described in some previous comments.

 

Letterboxes are a little different as a traditional Letterbox (ie not at the posted coordinates) would included non-GPS tasks in order to locate the container; so that's not so much about confirming coordinates as confirming that the person has done the right thing or is in the right area.

A lot of multi caches and mystery caches (and also some wherigos) I know involve such elements as well and that was one of the aspects I tried to address.

The guidelines just require that a cache involves one GPS task not that all tasks need to be GPS tasks.

Yes. How does that contrast what I said? Both are true, but the question remains: When determining coordinates (regardless of cache type), is it good for the CO to confirm them correct or not? Not a cut-and-dry answer. That can of course in concept be extended to tasks and field puzzles.

 

The way I read CJ's question is whether one considers the puzzle and cachehunt as the entire experience, or if the puzzle is one task and the cachehunt is a separate one.

Good point but this wasn't exactly my question. I understand that there are two approaches. The question was more about experience that COs of the "first type" have in communications with visitors of their caches who asked for verification.

Right, and I think some good points were raised about the side effects [for the CO] of the "first type", quite reliant on the scope of the experience and expectations of the finder in taking on the task of finding such a cache, and whether the owner is willing to deal with those side effects :) (whether it's fewer finders, or more confirmation requests to ignore/deny, or frustrated finders potentially looking in the wrong places and feeling their time is wasted, etc). There's nothing "wrong" with the puzzle+cachehunt being intertwined, it's just, I'd say, a bit more of a riskier style in the context of providing enjoyment for the cache finder, depending on how it's all constructed.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

Good point but this wasn't exactly my question. I understand that there are two approaches. The question was more about experience that COs of the "first type" have in communications with visitors of their caches who asked for verification.

 

I think that there are much more than two approaches or two kinds of COs.

 

I do not offer a geochecker for any of my mystery caches but I provide variable checks for them. I have some caches where I'm not willing to give away certain informations.

What's important however is that none of my caches is a treasure hunting like caches. In a treasure hunting set-up I can understand your argument and I might deal differently with such a cache too.

 

I can recall from the early years that I could be very satisfactory to be successful for a puzzle cache and the thrill was certainly higher than when one knows already that the coordinates are correct. However there are situations when I prefer to know in advance that the coordinates are correct. My personal philosophy is to try to find a cache for the particular day that fits the best what I want to encounter, but that's not the mass approach. The majority meanwhile wants to have the caches so that they meet their personal demands.

Link to comment

I actually waited for the discussion to come to field puzzles B) Placing a field puzzle is a good option in this case - cachers usually don't need verification as they are already in place.

 

However, let's talk about tasks, not field puzzles.

 

Just for fun: an email dialogue between me (CJ) and an unknown geocacher (GC) from some different country.

 

GC: - Hello, I'm Dan from country N and I like your caches! Could you please confirm that I calculated coordinates of your puzzle cache XYZ correctly? (N ... E ...)

CJ: - Hi, welcome to Russia! Are you here in Moscow at the moment?

GC: - Nope, I'm at home.

CJ: - Are you going to visit our country soon? We could organize something special for you if you like. A small guided tour for example...

GC: - No, I have no plans to visit Russia. I'm just fond of puzzles and I wish to know if my answer to your riddle is correct.

Link to comment

I actually waited for the discussion to come to field puzzles B) Placing a field puzzle is a good option in this case - cachers usually don't need verification as they are already in place.

 

That's not true. I often encountered situations where cachers ask for verification in such cases and I also have encountered caches where checkers are available for the stages and/or the final - of course this requires mobile internet. While I'm not against offering such checkers, I do not feel that they should be a requirement.

 

However, let's talk about tasks, not field puzzles.

 

What is a task in your setting?

 

I mentioned field puzzles because many of the examples you referred to (also in the other thread and other discussions) are actually field puzzles.

 

Also your comparison about pirates and treasure hunting made me rather think of cache related tasks and not so much puzzles to be solved at home with no connection to the hidden container as in those cases I feel that separating the cache into solving the puzzle and finding the container as a quasi traditional is relatively natural and already implicit in the way the cache is set up (that's only my opinion).

 

Just for fun: an email dialogue between me (CJ) and an unknown geocacher (GC) from some different country.

 

Just out of curiosity: How did you react? Do you have an issue with providing verification in such a case too?

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

I actually waited for the discussion to come to field puzzles B) Placing a field puzzle is a good option in this case - cachers usually don't need verification as they are already in place.

 

However, let's talk about tasks, not field puzzles.

 

Just for fun: an email dialogue between me (CJ) and an unknown geocacher (GC) from some different country.

 

GC: - Hello, I'm Dan from country N and I like your caches! Could you please confirm that I calculated coordinates of your puzzle cache XYZ correctly? (N ... E ...)

CJ: - Hi, welcome to Russia! Are you here in Moscow at the moment?

GC: - Nope, I'm at home.

CJ: - Are you going to visit our country soon? We could organize something special for you if you like. A small guided tour for example...

GC: - No, I have no plans to visit Russia. I'm just fond of puzzles and I wish to know if my answer to your riddle is correct.

 

Except even this notion has issues. In our local area we have a cacher that goes back to the beginning of geocaching time. In the early days the cacher was like any of us.. always out hiding and finding caches. As time evolved, very serious physical limitations set in and the cacher can no longer get out in the field unless it's very close to home. But the cacher is also a genius and to stay in the geocaching game, all the cacher does is solve puzzles.. all over the country and I suspect all over the world. Now, I don't know if cacher is asking for confirmation or not where puzzle checkers aren't in the picture. But it DOES prove that we all still do cache our own way.

Link to comment

Except for straightforward stuff like hidden text, I skip nearly every puzzle without a geochecker. I have better things to do with my time than possibly search for a cache at completely incorrect coordinates.

That's generally my feeling about it. If the cache is in town somewhere, then it's not such a big deal to get the coords wrong. You can always try again with little lost. But if it involves hiking 2 hrs into the wilderness, then I'd be pretty bummed not to find it after that much effort. I've never had a CO not help me out if asked.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...