Jump to content

Changes to logging, specifically stopping double logs


duncanhoyle
Followers 18

Recommended Posts

I am fascinated to note that the brass cap and YOSM lovers all seem to be avoiding the issue that these caches never should have been anything other than locationless caches. I'd be interested to see a response that counters my view.

 

Locationless Caches only permitted one find per location. (At least if properly maintained.) I still have the link somewhere for checking whether your locationless find is anywhere near someone else's find.

Since the brass cap brings up a new location for lots of cachers to find, it would not have qualified as a Locationless Cache. Virtual would be a better choice. And it was grandfathered. The potential to grandfather the multi logs whould be grandfathered as well. Not everything meets the newest guidelines. That's why grandfathering is so interesting.

Call it virtual if you like. What other circumstance allows the periodic creation of new virtuals (as the "exceptions" pointed out in this thread certainly do?)

Link to comment

ETA: Interestingly, in examining lodgebarn's stats, the find count was the same everywhere, meaning the count must always be of total Find logs, not unique caches.

 

BUT, viewing the "All Geocache Finds" summary listing (which only includes non-archived found caches), logs on YOSM do some wierd stuff to the summary listing. Typically the listing shows 20 caches per 'page'. Any page with YOSM shows fewer - presumably the 'hidden' rows are duplicate logs on the virtual. But YOSM still shows on the page.

The bolded part of your statement is incorrect. Archived caches are included in the summary listing.

 

In the 20-per-page views, caches are displayed only once. Yes, if someone logs a cache multiple times then there will be pages with less than 20 caches because the duplicate finds will not be shown. YOSM finds in the 20-per-page views show up oddly (not in the correct chronological order) because of the various dates attached to the multiple logs.

Link to comment
Adopting a cache means that you assume responsibility for maintaining it. It's OK to have found logs on caches that you have adopted, but I'd say that assumes that you find them before adopting them. After that it's just logging your own cache.

 

There's a cache which I 1) adopted, 2) found, 3) passed on to someone else. It is an old, well loved cache. I located the inactive owner and persuaded him to give it to me. I did assume responsibility for maintaining it, though I later passed on that responsibility to someone more geographically able. Had I not done this, I would be discussing that cache in past tense rather than present tense.

 

Of course I could have logged a find before adopting it, figuring I'd delete the find if I were unable to adopt it and never found it. Or I could have waited and logged the find after passing it on. I could even have made the text and dates accurate, since those are editable. (Or is the system going to stop me from altering the date on a Found log to a date within a time period when I owned the cache?)

 

The announcement fails to answer lots of questions about ownership changes. As usual, it does not even recognize ownership changes, referring to OWNER as though that necessarily meant HIDER. Even when it doesn't make sense for the HIDER to log a find on a cache they hid (and I've said there are cases where it does make sense, though not many), this is different from a adoptive OWNER logging a find on a cache they did not HIDE.

 

If the problem trying to be solved is accidental multiple find logging (either from communications or website issues, or just from cluelessness), then focus on that problem rather than trying to make a bunch of "generally ought to" guidelines into absolute rules.

 

Edward

Link to comment

I have received official notice that the new changes do apply to my four caches.

Thank you to those that showed their support.Yes as pointed out these caches did have a small percentage of cachers finding them and they all enjoyed the hunts and had fun.Isn't that what geocaching is all about? Is there no place for the rare and unique geocache on geocaching.com. All four were very popular and all logs were legitimate finds.Each trig and brass cap location had a separate ID name and number.No double logs were ever made at the same location by the same geocacher.There was a smiley face at the end of each hunt but I guarantee that it was never about boosting stats. There are way easier ways to boost stats.As for "the post a note" comments geocaching would not be very popular if you couldn't get the smiley after a find. It just doesn't have the same effect. All smileys were earned there was no one looking for loopholes to advance their find counts.

So after more than 15 years of promoting and supporting and enjoying geocaching it is a sad day.

 

It did get me thinking of back on one of my better days geocaching when I met this young cacher.Shortly after the visit Jeremy went out and found one of my brass caps.For the fact checkers he just found one. I know I could have taken him to another one but he was a busy boy that day :)

 

11lr3bm.jpg

Link to comment
(p.s. if anyone actually has a link to the dead animal or find the sneaker virtual caches, I'd love to see one for myself -- for a while I was convinced that the stories were apocryphal)
There are likely no listings for the worst-case examples of virtual cache concepts. They were likely rejected by the volunteer reviewers.

 

As I understand it, the problem with virtual caches was the time spent rejecting these ideas, and then dealing with the appeals/protests/angst that resulted from the rejection.

 

Not unlike challenge caches a couple years ago, but I digress...

Link to comment
(p.s. if anyone actually has a link to the dead animal or find the sneaker virtual caches, I'd love to see one for myself -- for a while I was convinced that the stories were apocryphal)
There are likely no listings for the worst-case examples of virtual cache concepts. They were likely rejected by the volunteer reviewers.

 

The dead animal one was real. I saw it with my own eyes (the listing, not the dead animal). The CO's idea was to have people take pictures of it to document the decay process.

Link to comment

I have received official notice that the new changes do apply to my four caches.

Thank you to those that showed their support.Yes as pointed out these caches did have a small percentage of cachers finding them and they all enjoyed the hunts and had fun.Isn't that what geocaching is all about? Is there no place for the rare and unique geocache on geocaching.com. All four were very popular and all logs were legitimate finds.Each trig and brass cap location had a separate ID name and number.No double logs were ever made at the same location by the same geocacher.There was a smiley face at the end of each hunt but I guarantee that it was never about boosting stats. There are way easier ways to boost stats.As for "the post a note" comments geocaching would not be very popular if you couldn't get the smiley after a find. It just doesn't have the same effect. All smileys were earned there was no one looking for loopholes to advance their find counts.

So after more than 15 years of promoting and supporting and enjoying geocaching it is a sad day.

 

It did get me thinking of back on one of my better days geocaching when I met this young cacher.Shortly after the visit Jeremy went out and found one of my brass caps.For the fact checkers he just found one. I know I could have taken him to another one but he was a busy boy that day :)

 

11lr3bm.jpg

Well said Outforthehunt. A sad day indeed. Another victory for blandness and uniformity over the ability to accept diversity and variety. Also a pity to see someone who appears to have lost their compass.

The irony won't be lost on the numerous UK attendees of the 15th anniversary YOSM events.

Cameron & Debbie

Link to comment

About a year ago, Groundspeak brought Challenges caches back with a few clarification of the rules. This was necessary because Challenges had become a bit of a mess since everybody tried to be original in their own way. But at least one problem still exist with Challenge Caches: some of them require finding one or more caches on a specific date or a series of dates. Owners of date-specific Challenge caches would expect geocachers to actually get out and find a cache on the day they would claim a find for that cache. But a recurrent problem with caches that allow multiple founds is that most do not require additional visits for the additional Found logs. The result is that some geocachers use those caches to fill a few boxes in their caching calendar.

 

I'm surprised no-one brought this up yet but, when I saw the announcement, my first thought was that it would fix a loophole in the Challenge rules once and for all!

Link to comment

I have received official notice that the new changes do apply to my four caches.

Thank you to those that showed their support.Yes as pointed out these caches did have a small percentage of cachers finding them and they all enjoyed the hunts and had fun.Isn't that what geocaching is all about? Is there no place for the rare and unique geocache on geocaching.com. All four were very popular and all logs were legitimate finds.Each trig and brass cap location had a separate ID name and number.No double logs were ever made at the same location by the same geocacher.There was a smiley face at the end of each hunt but I guarantee that it was never about boosting stats. There are way easier ways to boost stats.As for "the post a note" comments geocaching would not be very popular if you couldn't get the smiley after a find. It just doesn't have the same effect. All smileys were earned there was no one looking for loopholes to advance their find counts.

So after more than 15 years of promoting and supporting and enjoying geocaching it is a sad day.

 

It did get me thinking of back on one of my better days geocaching when I met this young cacher.Shortly after the visit Jeremy went out and found one of my brass caps.For the fact checkers he just found one. I know I could have taken him to another one but he was a busy boy that day :)

 

11lr3bm.jpg

Well said Outforthehunt. A sad day indeed. Another victory for blandness and uniformity over the ability to accept diversity and variety. Also a pity to see someone who appears to have lost their compass.

The irony won't be lost on the numerous UK attendees of the 15th anniversary YOSM events.

Cameron & Debbie

 

I'll second that.

 

Those of us who get our fun from being out in the countryside walking and caching have just lost out on some of that fun, but at least in the UK we have other trig. sites run by enthusiasts to go to, and other cache listing sites which allow virtuals ...

 

RIP YOSM as we know and enjoy it, and thanks Outforthehunt for the 15 years of fun you've provided for cachers on two continents.

Link to comment

ETA: Interestingly, in examining lodgebarn's stats, the find count was the same everywhere, meaning the count must always be of total Find logs, not unique caches.

 

BUT, viewing the "All Geocache Finds" summary listing (which only includes non-archived found caches), logs on YOSM do some wierd stuff to the summary listing. Typically the listing shows 20 caches per 'page'. Any page with YOSM shows fewer - presumably the 'hidden' rows are duplicate logs on the virtual. But YOSM still shows on the page.

The bolded part of your statement is incorrect. Archived caches are included in the summary listing.

 

In the 20-per-page views, caches are displayed only once. Yes, if someone logs a cache multiple times then there will be pages with less than 20 caches because the duplicate finds will not be shown. YOSM finds in the 20-per-page views show up oddly (not in the correct chronological order) because of the various dates attached to the multiple logs.

 

Right, sorry I was thinking searching for caches found by a user. Yes archived caches show in the summary view of Geocache finds via the user profile.

Not that that particular point was relevant to the main point, the rest of which we are in agreement. :)

Link to comment
They had their time. Now it's time to go

 

I'm very confused with this type of comment? What is geocaching? Well here's a log from my Brass Cap cache that does give me a great explanation of what geocaching is all about. Note the comment....

"They are the reason we have explored so much of our great province. The most favourite reason I love hunting for caps is all the fun I’ve had finding them with family and good friends and the memories we have created together "

 

Wow! 15 years of brass caps. I found my first brass cap back in June 2008, so I am only approaching my 9th Anniversary of finding them. Hunting brass caps has taken me as far north as Steen River at the NWT border to as far south as Coutts at the USA border. They have taken me as far west as Boundary Lake near the BC border to as far east as Jaycee Park at the SK border. I have found brass caps at elevations as low as 249m in Fort McMurray to as high as 2803m on the summit of Mount Allan. Cap hunting has had me looking in areas as public as under a manhole in front of the old King Eddy Hotel in Calgary to the middle of nowhere in a forest north of Hinton. They’ve brought me from large cities to tiny hamlets and National Parks to small greenspaces. I’ve had the pleasure of many memorable brass cap outings involving extreme weather, forest fires, animal encounters, route finding challenges, snow coverage, excavations, metal detecting and just plain difficulty in finding them. They are the reason we have explored so much of our great province. The most favourite reason I love hunting for caps is all the fun I’ve had finding them with family and good friends and the memories we have created together.

Link to comment

I agree with both of you. The reason I got into geocaching was to have fun and visit places I had never been. Brass caps have taken me all over Alberta as well. Likewise, the moving cache Stash n' Dash (GCA0D6) has been a constant delight in my family since it is a competition to see who can find it first in its new hiding spot. The fact that it has a cooling-off period of 20 days means you have to await your turn to find it again. Delightful caches all of them. I see no real point in the proposed rules since I maintain my caches and delete duplicate logs regularly.

Link to comment

I think this will put a stop to some issues that tend to generate a lot of whining, so that's probably good.

 

Just to be clear, we can log more than one different type of log on a cache, right? So I can't log "Will Attend" twice, but I can log "Will Attend" followed by "Attended" after the event?

Really don't understand. You found it why do you need to find it again. You can always post "write note" instead.

Link to comment

GC45CC "Ye Ole Survey Monuments" was originally created as a VIRTUAL and grandfathered, i.e. allowed to remain by geocaching.com, after virtual's were withdrawn - Groundspeak knew then and therefore should still be aware that the task for this cache involves cachers visiting different locations throughout the UK, each visit involving collecting specific information and sending this to the CO before logging as 'found'.

 

As this cache is grandfathered by Groundspeak and therefore ALREADY has "special case" status, it SHOULD be allowed to remain with it's inherent multiple-found-logging. It is a popular cache amongst the UK caching fraternity that are interested in getting more out of the hobby that finding a filmpot by leaning out of their vehicle at the roadside!!

 

In general I wholeheartedly support the change to prevent/avoid multiple found logs going forward, which incidental has really only arisen to the extend now seen since logging via smartphones in the field was possible. This shouldn't and needn't mean that old well supported individual grandfathered caches cannot remain.

 

There have been a lot of comments in support of keeping this cache 'as-is', but also some unnecessarily derogatory comments too - please let's keep a sensible factual thread going!

Link to comment
As this cache is grandfathered by Groundspeak and therefore ALREADY has "special case" status, it SHOULD be allowed to remain with it's inherent multiple-found-logging. It is a popular cache amongst the UK caching fraternity that are interested in getting more out of the hobby that finding a filmpot by leaning out of their vehicle at the roadside!!

It will STILL BE grandfathered. You just have to accept the fact that you can't break the "one cache - one find" rule anymore.

Link to comment
As this cache is grandfathered by Groundspeak and therefore ALREADY has "special case" status, it SHOULD be allowed to remain with it's inherent multiple-found-logging. It is a popular cache amongst the UK caching fraternity that are interested in getting more out of the hobby that finding a filmpot by leaning out of their vehicle at the roadside!!

It will STILL BE grandfathered. You just have to accept the fact that you can't break the "one cache - one find" rule anymore.

A write note would mean everyone could carry on as normal, as long as the YOSM stats page is still updated as that is our record of finds. All you'd be missing is one more added to your Geocaching stats, and I for one am happy to accept that to keep GC45CC going.You'd still be able to add photos and a description of your day to the cache page. The thing is though, Outforthehunt doesn't sound keen on the write note idea and I fear he may decide to archive it. I hope I'm wrong.

Link to comment

A sad state of affairs for the Yosm. I love it. I love finding a trigpoint (which I log on their website) and then seeing if its ever been a YOSM. For me its a bonus smiley ... I'd still look for them even if hosted on another website. Its about the walk, the company, the banter, the history, the location, and of course the fabulous 15 year celebration events hosted around the UK, which were testament to how much we love this cache.

 

It's a shame that Groundspeak aren't listening to its paying customers when we say we want to be able to keep this cache.

Link to comment

I see the official announcement is out now.

 

To me, it is all logical except the NM log. I can not see why they want to stop a CO logging NM on their own cache. I don't see this as a big deal, but it can be useful. E.g. a low priority issue, like a damp log (and I mean damp, not soaking). Or even following a DNF to remind the owner to check it.

 

The only logic I can think of is: NM is to notify the owner. If the owner already knows, then no NM is needed.

 

It still seems odd to do programming work to stop something which I can't see doing any harm, and the current implementation may actually help. Especially with the focus on quality.

 

Maybe I'm missing the hidden evil in Owner submitted NM logs.

Link to comment

 

Wrong...dead wrong...I see people logging many time in one day...

 

http://www.yosm.org.uk/cacher_list.php

 

Look up most in one day. Sound pretty easy to me. Its just looking up the map and make a plan to find them.

 

 

The fact that people log it many times in one day proves that it is popular, not that it is easy. Groups of cachers organise day-drips specifically for the purpose, often driving hundreds of miles. The physical effort and commitment involved in finding the average YoSM is far higher than it is to find the average traditional, making your spurious claim that YoSM has anything to do with padding statistics look ridiculous.

Link to comment

 

Wrong...dead wrong...I see people logging many time in one day...

 

http://www.yosm.org.uk/cacher_list.php

 

Look up most in one day. Sound pretty easy to me. Its just looking up the map and make a plan to find them.

 

 

The fact that people log it many times in one day proves that it is popular, not that it is easy. Groups of cachers organise day-drips specifically for the purpose, often driving hundreds of miles. The physical effort and commitment involved in finding the average YoSM is far higher than it is to find the average traditional, making your spurious claim that YoSM has anything to do with padding statistics look ridiculous.

 

I don't really see the relevance of how easy or hard they are. So the record is 29 in one day.

 

It is moot now, Groundspeak as spoken. And I don't personally have an issue with their decision. But to try to explain from the "YOSM" point of view. As has been explained, these are virtual caches. With a "workaround" that allows logging under a single GC code for each distinct virtual. So yes, logically it means the CO of YOSM has been allowed to create new "virtual" caches in this way for the past 15 years.

 

Think about "normal" virtual caches. Let's say Groundspeak announces tomorrow, that as part of the further phase out of Virtual caches, that "found it" logs will no longer be allowed on any existing grandfathered virtual. They won't be archived, so you can still find them (and write a note). But you can't log a find. I bet you the amount of cachers looking for these virtuals will drop dramatically. Why? Because everyone is in it "for the numbers"? No. Because logging finds (which includes watching your statistics) is a key part of the game for most. Sure, I might visit some of those virtuals anyway. But will I, or most cachers, continue to seek out Virtuals if I can't log "found"? No.

 

So if you forget about the details of how this was implemented, this is what is happening to YOSM. They are virtual "caches" which people have been finding for 15 years. You can still find them, you just can't log them as a find.

 

If one can't understand why someone who likes finding such caches is disappointed, without having to accuse them of "only being it for the numbers" (which is an insult to most any cacher), then there isn't anything I can say to change that. But I find it sad.

 

But I also understand that the "workaround" used is an anomaly, and it has to go.

Link to comment

I have received official notice that the new changes do apply to my four caches.

Thank you to those that showed their support.Yes as pointed out these caches did have a small percentage of cachers finding them and they all enjoyed the hunts and had fun.Isn't that what geocaching is all about? Is there no place for the rare and unique geocache on geocaching.com. All four were very popular and all logs were legitimate finds.Each trig and brass cap location had a separate ID name and number.No double logs were ever made at the same location by the same geocacher.There was a smiley face at the end of each hunt but I guarantee that it was never about boosting stats. There are way easier ways to boost stats.As for "the post a note" comments geocaching would not be very popular if you couldn't get the smiley after a find. It just doesn't have the same effect. All smileys were earned there was no one looking for loopholes to advance their find counts.

So after more than 15 years of promoting and supporting and enjoying geocaching it is a sad day.

 

It did get me thinking of back on one of my better days geocaching when I met this young cacher.Shortly after the visit Jeremy went out and found one of my brass caps.For the fact checkers he just found one. I know I could have taken him to another one but he was a busy boy that day :)

 

11lr3bm.jpg

 

It's such a shame to lose these well enjoyed geocaches. Some of my YOSM finds have been very enjoyable and were a challenge to find, fantastic locations and views. I will miss checking if a trig point I pass could be logged as a find.

 

Thanks to outforthehunt for maintaining these caches and responding promptly to our finds for 15 years. RIP YOSM's.

 

bdb30ea4-2d58-4814-a214-fb1c80b06032_l.jpg

Link to comment

I would just like to add my name to the list of people expressing their disappointment that this well-motivated change to prevent people accidentally logging a traditional cache more than once may inadvertently see the end of the extremely popular UK's Ye Old Survey Monuments cache (GC45CC). In the 14 years I have enjoyed this hobby I can't recall a change being implemented that will end up impacting my motivation and way in which I geocache. I plan trips around this specific cache, maybe visiting one or two of the locations, and picking up other caches in the area. It has taken me to many beautiful places and given me many adventures. Getting an additional smiley for visiting this cache has never been never a real motivation but seeing where I am on the league table of visitors has certainly been a driving force. May I ask out friends at GC HQ to please make an exception for this cache and allow us YOSM enthusiasts to continue to enjoy this cache. Many thanks.

Link to comment

I have received official notice that the new changes do apply to my four caches.

Thank you to those that showed their support.Yes as pointed out these caches did have a small percentage of cachers finding them and they all enjoyed the hunts and had fun.Isn't that what geocaching is all about? Is there no place for the rare and unique geocache on geocaching.com. All four were very popular and all logs were legitimate finds.Each trig and brass cap location had a separate ID name and number.No double logs were ever made at the same location by the same geocacher.There was a smiley face at the end of each hunt but I guarantee that it was never about boosting stats. There are way easier ways to boost stats.As for "the post a note" comments geocaching would not be very popular if you couldn't get the smiley after a find. It just doesn't have the same effect. All smileys were earned there was no one looking for loopholes to advance their find counts.

So after more than 15 years of promoting and supporting and enjoying geocaching it is a sad day.

 

It did get me thinking of back on one of my better days geocaching when I met this young cacher.Shortly after the visit Jeremy went out and found one of my brass caps.For the fact checkers he just found one. I know I could have taken him to another one but he was a busy boy that day :)

 

11lr3bm.jpg

Well said Outforthehunt. A sad day indeed. Another victory for blandness and uniformity over the ability to accept diversity and variety. Also a pity to see someone who appears to have lost their compass.

The irony won't be lost on the numerous UK attendees of the 15th anniversary YOSM events.

Cameron & Debbie

 

I'll second that.

 

Those of us who get our fun from being out in the countryside walking and caching have just lost out on some of that fun, but at least in the UK we have other trig. sites run by enthusiasts to go to, and other cache listing sites which allow virtuals ...

 

You will still be able to get your fun from being out in the countryside walking and caching and visiting YOSM sites. The only thing that will be different is that you won't be able to log a Find on a YOSM cache if you've previously log a find on one, and your find count won't be incremented. You'll have to log a note instead.

Link to comment

Fair play to our American friends not quiet getting the appeal of the YOSM maybe it is just a British thing, we are the older crankier country after all.

 

Then again they voted in the Donald which most over here can't understand either, mad as a bog of frogs that one so getting rid of the YOSM probably sounds like a stroke of genius.

Link to comment

Then again they voted in the Donald which most over here can't understand either, mad as a bog of frogs that one so getting rid of the YOSM probably sounds like a stroke of genius.

Just like leaving the EU sounds like something clever to do?

 

Let's get back to discussing geocaching :)

Link to comment

Fair play to our American friends not quiet getting the appeal of the YOSM maybe it is just a British thing, we are the older crankier country after all.

 

The Americans do understand the appeal of logging benchmarks which is why the Americans are catered to by Groundspeak and allowed to log benchmarks. It's only the UK and Canada that are having our benchmark logging taken away. The excuse is that Groundspeak prefers to cater to people too stupid not to accidentally log a cache more than once and too lazy to delete their extra logs, instead of catering to long-time geocachers who actually use the system as intended.

 

I've only ever logged one YOSM but I loved the idea of YOSM and very much appreciated the time and effort outforthehunt dedicated to keeping the cache viable for over 15 years. I also attended one of the extremely popular 15 year anniversary celebration events and can testify that there were new people in attendance who were already ramblers and trigpointers, but not geocachers yet, who were interested enough to climb a T3 hill to attend a geocaching event because it was celebrating Ye Ole Survey Monuments.

Link to comment

You will still be able to get your fun from being out in the countryside walking and caching and visiting YOSM sites. The only thing that will be different is that you won't be able to log a Find on a YOSM cache if you've previously log a find on one, and your find count won't be incremented. You'll have to log a note instead.

 

I know a few people that really like going out and finding benchmarks, the closest equivalent we have. They still enjoy it even though their find count doesn't get a +1.

Link to comment

I haven't yet read the link in GSAK but I have read a few of the reply posts. Will it be impossible to log a duplicate log or will it ask if you want to log a duplicate log and you have the option of accepting (needed for YOSM) or declining as for an accidental repost?

Link to comment

I haven't yet read the link in GSAK but I have read a few of the reply posts. Will it be impossible to log a duplicate log or will it ask if you want to log a duplicate log and you have the option of accepting (needed for YOSM) or declining as for an accidental repost?

 

You can read the official announcement from Groundspeak in the Announcements subforum:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=343632

 

As you may have learned from a community volunteer reviewer or from one of our API partners, in early to mid-April, we will begin enforcing changes to the logging rules through the user interface on Geocaching.com and the Geocaching® app. The changes take effect for Authorized Developers on May 8, 2017.

 

Cache owners will no longer be able to log a Find, DNF, Webcam Photo Taken, Needs Archived, or Needs Maintenance on their owned caches. However, event owners can log an Attended or Will Attend on their own events.

 

Players will no longer be able to log more than 1 (one) Find, Attended, Webcam Photo Taken, or Will Attend per cache. Players will still be able to change a Write Note to a Find if they have not already logged a Find on the cache.

 

These changes are not retroactive. Past logs are not affected.

 

Geocaching HQ will not be making exceptions to these logging rules for any specific caches.

 

We believe these changes will streamline the core logging structure of the game, address requests for these changes from the community, and reduce confusion for our newer community members.

 

We’ll share more details in the coming weeks.

 

This post has been edited by Geocaching HQ: Yesterday, 01:15 PM

Reason for edit: Edited to address questions about exceptions

 

How this will work hasn't been detailed as yet.

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

Groundspeak continues to diminish the pleasure of geocaching with the planned demise of multiple logging and the loss of YOSM in the UK. There is no need to destroy this wonderful, well supported and historical cache. As has been said earlier in the thread, either make an exception for YOSM or go down the route of a 'confirm multiple log' pop up box. Most are probably accidental so this will help.

 

Yes, YOSM has the same GC number but geocachers have to work (often very hard) to access these caches and get a 'find' which, is also checked as well as can be expected by the CO. I can sit at a so-called 'event', stuff my face and not move from a picnic table for three days and claim a few 'finds' because someone has decided that 'attending' in the morning and 'looking at trackables' in the afternoon, watching a 'flash-mob' the day after etc, are all unique 'sessions'. Loads of 'finds' for not moving from a field or building.

 

If people want to claim multiple finds for what is basically the same event just by turning up, good luck to them it's part of how they like to play the game, it's the social aspect of geocaching. Don't kid me that because they have individual GC numbers they are different things - they aren't. Conversely, YOSM with a single GC number are all very unique, located throughout the UK and N. Ireland, take effort to locate and, have an historical connection to mapping but all will be classed as 'one find'.

 

Sitting on my backside in one location can get me multiple finds, climbing mountains the length and breadth of the UK doesn't. Well done Groundspeak, another 'chuck out the baby with the bathwater' moment.

Link to comment

You will still be able to get your fun from being out in the countryside walking and caching and visiting YOSM sites. The only thing that will be different is that you won't be able to log a Find on a YOSM cache if you've previously log a find on one, and your find count won't be incremented. You'll have to log a note instead.

 

I know a few people that really like going out and finding benchmarks, the closest equivalent we have. They still enjoy it even though their find count doesn't get a +1.

 

Although I don't have specific details I believe a request was made by a UK cacher asking to have a combined or similar scheme to the US benchmarks for the UK Trig points a few years ago. Such an implementation was refused.

 

The YOSM was the only route we could take under the "roof" of geocaching as a whole. I certainly and I'm sure many others also do prefer the under "one roof" approach. The YOSM had extra appeal to many of which Trig would become a YOSM next.

 

Yes there is the UK Trigpointing site and I have used that for some logs but certainly not all of the Trigs/YOSMs that I have visited.

As far as I know the UK Trigpointing site is provided by a private individual. Though the site has run for a great number of years, will it continue forever? I guess it depends on that individuals continued generosity and longevity.

 

Please consider a scheme to retain YOSM "in house". The concept of having a split accounting system "you found X YOSMs as found logs and Y YOSMs as note type logs seems totally alien to me.

 

Please develop an acceptable scheme for the YOSM to continue.

 

Geocaching is supposed to be a global game. I have logged one perhaps two of the US benchmarks just to add variety to my caching. I would have liked to think other global visitors to the UK would have appreciated the YOSMs existance and uniqueness would have had reciprocal appeal but no all we have seen is hostility within this thread.

Link to comment

I’ve been away for a day and a half and had hoped a common sense solution to allowing YSMs to continue in their current format would have been achieved on my return. Sadly, that would not appear to be the case.

As a UK cacher since 2001, I have seen numerous changes in the caching world. Some, clearly needed to be implemented, whilst other changes have been retrograde steps to say the least.

I’m not particularly interested in numbers, ftfs, streaks, numbers of caches found in a day, urban caches, nanos etc. but will be out at least a couple of times most weeks and have logged 3,345 finds (including 281 YSMs) and 175 hides. If people are keen on any/all of the above aspects of caching that’s fine by me, it doesn’t interfere with my life.

As far as the YSM is concerned, to me, this is clearly not a locationless cache as they all have a well researched and interesting location (with the odd exception). If you don’t want to find and log them or aren’t interested that’s fine by me as well. If you’re not from the UK I don’t see this has any impact on you anyway. This is only a hobby at the end of the day and there’s enough conflict in the world already!!!

 

The geocaching website states “Geocaches can be found all over the world. It is common for geocachers to hide caches in locations that are important to them, reflecting a special interest or skill of the cache owner. These locations can be quite diverse. They may be at your local park, at the end of a long hike, underwater or on the side of a city street.”

 

The concept of the YSM appears to fit this concept on most if not all levels (which can’t be said for a lot of caches out there). Whether it’s classified as a virtual, locationless, moves around or whatever appears to me on the face of it a pointless debate. It’s out there being enjoyed by many cachers and has excellent support from the Ye Ole Survey Monument website. Clearly, they wouldn’t be allowed now as the rules are different but to deny it’s continuing existence given the amount of support it receives is sad indeed.

The demise of GC45CC is a bit like giving a child a toy which gives him/her a lot of enjoyment then snatching it away from them with no rational explanation.

 

If we’re in the mood for change can I offer my the following for consideration –

1. No cache to be placed within 50 metres of a house as this can cause a lot of concern for people.

2. All caches to be at least 400 metres apart. This gives people a chance to enjoy their surroundings rather than spend their life peering at a gps/phone.

3. No cache container to be less than 100ml and have a log book that can be written on.

4. Letterbox caches to be discontinued. It’s just a normal cache with a stamp that no-one uses anyway.

 

As the old cartoon ending said “That’s all folks”. A huge thanks must go to Out for The Hunt for well researched locations. Top man.

 

Thank you for reading this, from a very disappointed (ex?) cacher.

Link to comment

I have received official notice that the new changes do apply to my four caches.

Thank you to those that showed their support.Yes as pointed out these caches did have a small percentage of cachers finding them and they all enjoyed the hunts and had fun.Isn't that what geocaching is all about? Is there no place for the rare and unique geocache on geocaching.com. All four were very popular and all logs were legitimate finds.Each trig and brass cap location had a separate ID name and number.No double logs were ever made at the same location by the same geocacher.There was a smiley face at the end of each hunt but I guarantee that it was never about boosting stats. There are way easier ways to boost stats.As for "the post a note" comments geocaching would not be very popular if you couldn't get the smiley after a find. It just doesn't have the same effect. All smileys were earned there was no one looking for loopholes to advance their find counts.

So after more than 15 years of promoting and supporting and enjoying geocaching it is a sad day.

 

It did get me thinking of back on one of my better days geocaching when I met this young cacher.Shortly after the visit Jeremy went out and found one of my brass caps.For the fact checkers he just found one. I know I could have taken him to another one but he was a busy boy that day :)

 

11lr3bm.jpg

Well said Outforthehunt. A sad day indeed. Another victory for blandness and uniformity over the ability to accept diversity and variety. Also a pity to see someone who appears to have lost their compass.

The irony won't be lost on the numerous UK attendees of the 15th anniversary YOSM events.

Cameron & Debbie

Groundspeak as a whole has lost their compass. Blandness is a good word to use as it describes exactly what is promoted these days. Virtual, locationless, and challenge caches have all been dealt their death blows. I'm actually surprised Groundspeak hasn't nixed mysteries and multi caches yet.

 

As far as multiple logging, i have always thought it silly to log one's own cache or log multiple times on other caches. I really wondered why Groundspeak didn't nix those abilities a long time ago. But at the same time, i also realized there were some creative caches designed to be logged differently. Doesn't bother me a bit to see Groundspeak take action on this, for those 99% of regular type caches out there. However, those unique, already grandfathered caches shouldn't be thrown under the bus like this.

 

Yeah, i realize i just wasted 5 minutes typing this since i know it's falling on deaf ears (blind eyes?). As i've said before, there aren't many companies that can treat their customers this way and still stay in business. Being the only geocaching website in town definitely has its advantages.

Link to comment

I am saddened to see the ending of what was to me the "best cache ever". These physical markers "on the ground" that tied the world together, making our maps more accurate and placed with such tremendous effort are very significant to me. No matter what the type, vertical or horizontal control points, gravity measurement points, border markers or historical places markers, they all mark an important essentially permanent spot on the earth where something is being or has been measured. I like to think of these things when I locate one.

 

And best of all this cache was created and managed by a surveyor who has walked the walk and talked the talk. He posted only those survey monuments that fitted his vision and didn't violate geocaching rules such as private property locations. I want to thank outforthehunt for his efforts over the years, it was greatly appreciated by us.

 

It seems strange that this cache (GC43F3) and its twin in Great Britain (GC45CC) which are essentially related directly to the real world of map making and exploration, a geocaching theme I believe, are to be terminated. Whereas endless and mindless matchstick containers placed along a road on a fence post for no other reason than they are 170 meters from the last one continue to litter the country side.

 

Surely, there is room for both ends of the game, The lowest common denominator always results in a weaker product unfortunately.

Link to comment

I have four caches that can be logged more than one time. How are the new changes going to affect these caches? All four were created early on in geocaching history to help promote geocaching. In the early days of geocaching in Alberta and the UK there was vast areas with very few caches to find.I started the The Brass Cap in Alberta and Ye Ole Survey Monuments in the UK and gave cachers in all areas something to find and a way to check the accuracy of their gps as well as taking them to locations they normally would not have seen. Stash n' Dash and Leap Frog caches were created to help promote caching in the City of Calgary.

I have maintained these caches for 15 years. All logs have been checked and if they are not logged as per cache log requirements they have been deleted or the cacher has adjusted them to conform with what was required.

The reason I have maintained these caches so many years is the logs and pictures I get on the pages. You will not find many "Found it" logs. Most are entertaining and amusing.

There has always been concerns with multiple logging Brass Cap and Ye Ole Survey Monuments caches which I have never understood as each location is separate.I have tried to add some history, a view a hike in most locations to add to the hunts.I have also been asked numerous times for a cap or YOSM to be placed near events.I am not sure if my caches are going to be affected by the new changes but will be watching with interest

Thanks for everything you have done for promoting caching for all these years. With 310 Finds on GC43F3, you know I have enjoyed your efforts! The decision not to allow exceptions for grandfathered moving caches is a very shortsighted one by Groundspeak. The powers that be are certainly more interested in promoting the game to the smartphone/newbie generation of cachers and has no respect for the history of the hobby and the pioneers like yourself that worked to make it grow.

 

I was late to the game and didn't log my first cap until October of 2005, almost two years after I first started caching. Since that time GC43F3 has provided some of the best caching moments I have ever experienced. Many of my most memorable road trips were pure "brass hunts". Caching is losing something very special with this change.

Link to comment

About a year ago, Groundspeak brought Challenges caches back with a few clarification of the rules.

I'd laugh if this statement weren't so sad. Those "few clarifications" blocked all but a small handful of challenge cache types.

 

This was necessary...

No, it really wasn't, they just wanted to get the people that complained about challenge caches out of their hair. I assume that's the case here, too, with a few people complaining about multiple found logs or the "high learning curve" of discovering you could accidentally log the same cache twice.

Link to comment

I have never really understood the logic behind the brass cap virtuals.

 

I think they really should have been locationless caches in the first place -- and therefore archived with the rest of them back in 2006. In which case, brass cap hunters from the UK and Canada should really view the last 11 years as a gift, rather than looking at this (arguably overdue) policy change as punishment.

Locationless: Find something and then post the coordinates.

Brass Cap: Coordinates are posted and then go find it.

 

Not the same thing at all. Logging a cache like GC43F3 is not a simple matter of finding any old survey marker and then logging a find.

Link to comment

This change is helping to keep the find count correct, I don't see how that can be bad...

If you care about your Find count, you will watch for accidently duplicate logs yourself.

 

If someone else doesn't pay enough attention to their logs to notice their find count is off, it clearly doesn't mean that much to them so why should I care?

Link to comment

Of course those folks who can use one cache to obtain many smilies would like it...it bumps their numbers.

If anyone is interested in just bumping numbers, they can go do a power trail. Heck, they don't even need to do the power trail since no one ever checks the logs on them anyway. Just sit at your desk and log away. Brass Capping has never been about numbers.

Link to comment

Fair play to our American friends not quiet getting the appeal of the YOSM maybe it is just a British thing, we are the older crankier country after all.

 

Then again they voted in the Donald which most over here can't understand either, mad as a bog of frogs that one so getting rid of the YOSM probably sounds like a stroke of genius.

If you don't mind, I'll just bypass the bizarre, off-topic stuff. Okay?

 

Curious, are you saying that a reward requirement is a "British thing" ?

- Because I thought it was just society today in general...

 

As an American, I believe many here understand full well what the appeal is.

In fact, it's popular enough that many have enjoyed that part of the hobby without the need for a "smiley" to find them. ;)

They're not included in the find count here...

 

We know of a few folks with over 800 benchmark finds.

With none on the "smiley count", yeah, I think we get it. :)

Link to comment

Fair play to our American friends not quiet getting the appeal of the YOSM maybe it is just a British thing, we are the older crankier country after all.

 

I'm an American attempting to understand that logging ones own caches multipil times is a British thing, but it makes no more sense to me that Armchair logging caches over seas is a Greetings from Germany thing. :unsure:

Link to comment

This change is helping to keep the find count correct, I don't see how that can be bad...

If you care about your Find count, you will watch for accidently duplicate logs yourself.

 

If someone else doesn't pay enough attention to their logs to notice their find count is off, it clearly doesn't mean that much to them so why should I care?

You took a tiny part of my response to something else, and took it out of context. I care about my find count, and I make sure it's correct. If you don't care about your find count, I couldn't care less :)

Link to comment

Hi

I’m one of the people who has logged the YOSM cache multiple times so obviously I have a vested interest in this thread.

I discovered the existence of the YOSM cache when I noted some other geocachers had more “found it” logs than they had distinct caches found and it aroused my interest – why would anyone log a cache twice? The very idea seemed daft to say the least. I have found the cache round the corner from me loads of times (well I check it each time I post a letter) but I would never dream of logging it each time, so why would someone do this?

The thought crossed my mind that they were “padding” their numbers but I felt that if they wanted to increase their numbers that much let them if it keeps them happy.

Then I discovered that the cache they were logging multiple times was the YOSM cache. The more I read about this cache the more I liked the idea and it seemed so in tune with the idea of the sport of geocaching. It gets people out into the countryside – visiting locations that they otherwise would not visit using GPS to find something.

After my first find I have become more and more keen on this cache. I still cache but the major trips I do now are based around the different locations recorded for this cache. I have travelled to the outer Hebrides to find this cache – I was the first to find one on Lewis and a couple of weekends ago travelled many miles to be the first to find another of these locations. I challenged myself to find 25 in one day – no mean feat as this involved over 500 miles of driving the length of Scotland (which if you knew what Scottish roads were like you would be quite impressed), climbing hills in the dark. I did not get my 25th find as it was impossible to spot in the dark (it was a 0.5 inch bolt buried under a clump of grass).

Each of my finds for this cache has been memorable and I feel in each case has merited the smiley earned. I keep track of the exact location of the find, altitude of the location, time found and have photographed the object found. I can certainly show that in finding this cache I have been in many different (and lovely) locations.

I can understand why some people would think that I have been “padding” my numbers and that I am cheating in logging this cache multiple times – this is what I thought people were doing before I started to search for YOSMs. I would humbly disagree with you now.

It looks like this will change now and, if I have been reading between the lines correctly; the cache may be archived by the owner. I think this would be a shame as it has given me many hours of fun.

Thanks for the cache.

Link to comment
It seems strange that this cache (GC43F3) and its twin in Great Britain (GC45CC) which are essentially related directly to the real world of map making and exploration, a geocaching theme I believe, are to be terminated.

Whereas endless and mindless matchstick containers placed along a road on a fence post for no other reason than they are 170 meters from the last one continue to litter the country side.

If it seems strange, have you questioned the CO why yet?

Last I saw by watchlists, it's the CO who posted they're to be archived.

If they want to take their ball and go home, I kinda understand that. :)

 

Have you heard something different?

Link to comment

Fair play to our American friends not quiet getting the appeal of the YOSM maybe it is just a British thing, we are the older crankier country after all.

 

Then again they voted in the Donald which most over here can't understand either, mad as a bog of frogs that one so getting rid of the YOSM probably sounds like a stroke of genius.

If you don't mind, I'll just bypass the bizarre, off-topic stuff. Okay?

 

Curious, are you saying that a reward requirement is a "British thing" ?

- Because I thought it was just society today in general...

 

As an American, I believe many here understand full well what the appeal is.

In fact, it's popular enough that many have enjoyed that part of the hobby without the need for a "smiley" to find them. ;)

They're not included in the find count here...

 

We know of a few folks with over 800 benchmark finds.

With none on the "smiley count", yeah, I think we get it. :)

 

The difference being US benchmarks are catered for under the main site umbrella.

 

The 3 US benchmarks I have found are easily viewable on the main site together with a running total.

 

When the UK asked for a similar system we were refused.

 

We took the only route possible to us at that time which is now causing such uproar.

 

Geocaching is supposed to be a global hobby but seems very discriminating both in the past and once again now.

 

If benchmarking fall under the remit of geocaching then the global benchmarks should be included within the site framework or alternatively the US ones removed.

 

Dual standards are not conducive to harmony.

 

Is now is the time to standardise logging then it is time to do it universally.

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 18
×
×
  • Create New...