Self Geocaching Rules?

[+Inmountains]

Most of us place rules or guidelines on ourselves for the activities we enjoy.  Most games come with rules be it chess, Monopoly, Baseball, etc...  But Geocaching doesn't have much in the way of rules, just the 1/10 miles placement, not inside a business, having permission to place a cache, and a few other general rules.  So I was wondering what, if any, rules you place on yourself.  Things like:

1.  Having PERSONALLY been at a cache you are logging as a find. (I follow this 99.9% of the time.  I have ONE my son logged and ONE my wife logged that I was not personally at)

2.  Logging the find on the actual DAY you found it, not moving it around to meet some challenge?

3.  Replacing the cache, and log, better than you found it.

4.  Trying to pick up some trash while caching.

5.  Being friendly to muggles.

6.  As a Cache Owner, sending a Thank You email to someone who posted they made a repair on your cache (new log, found on ground and replaced, etc...)

7.  As a Cache Owner, performing maintenance when needed.

8.  Not doing a "throw down" without the COs permission.

9.  Following the Cache Owners instructions such as "no stamps", "no stickers", etc...

10.  Appreciating our hobby enough to be grateful to Groundspeak, to help newbies starting out, to thank the cache hiders and to "enjoy the ride" as much as the "find."

I don't pretend to be anyone's judge nor tell them how to play the game.  Whether it is a film canister under a Wal Mart parking lot light pole skirt or an Ammo Can atop a 14,000 feet peak in the Rockies, caching is meant to get us outside and enjoy the great outdoors.  If Geocaching is making you HAPPY, then you WIN!  When it is all over, there is no one to answer to for personal integrity, honor and respect.  Only the person in the mirror has to admit honor or dishonor.

[+niraD]

2 hours ago, Inmountains said:

3.  Replacing the cache, and log, better than you found it.

I replace everything the way I found it. The only exception is when something is obviously out of place (e.g., an ammo can I found sitting in the middle of the trail) or when I've done minor maintenance as a favor to the CO (e.g., adding a supplemental log sheet). I've had to tell cache owners where I found their caches because someone had hidden them "better" than they found them.

2 hours ago, Inmountains said:

8.  Not doing a "throw down" without the COs permission.

If you have the CO's permission, then it isn't a throw down. But I would only replace a cache with specific permission, not with generic "I don't want DNFs, so throw down a film canister" permission like some numbers trail owners give.

[+cerberus1]

I don't hide the cache "better than found" because I don't know how the cache was hidden by the CO, though sometimes the D/T may hint at it.  We've already been to caches were someone thought they'd hide "better than found", and the CO couldn't even find it after all the DNFs.

I prefer to do maintenance myself thanks.   We act on logs, not waiting for a NM, so don't get that happening too often.  But if it ever did, I'd prefer to fix it myself than have someone replace my Rite in Rain notebook with a piece of paper ripped off a calendar page, claiming they "helped"...

I don't do throwdowns.  Period.

 

[+Mausebiber]

5 hours ago, Inmountains said:

4.  Trying to pick up some trash while caching.

5.  Being friendly to muggles.

We were always concerned about our environment and were picking up trash before GC, also we are friendly to other people helping them whenever necessary.

This is really not GC specific, this should apply for everyone.

Quote

2.  Logging the find on the actual DAY you found it, not moving it around to meet some challenge?

There are many other reasons NOT to log the day you found the cache.  I know some cachers the are logging all there finds on the following Saturday, or at the end of the month.  I know some cachers not logging there find at all.

Edited November 14, 2017 by Mausebiber

[+Rebore]

Leave no trace behind except your footprints and your memories.

If you feel uncomfortable when searching for a cache, don't do it.

Log DNF, it's nothing to be ashamed of.

[+JL_HSTRE]

3 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

There are many other reasons NOT to log the day you found the cache.  I know some cachers the are logging all there finds on the following Saturday, or at the end of the month.

Why would someone do this? Worried about being stalked?

Edited November 14, 2017 by Joshism

[+Isonzo Karst]

I learned it from Lep in these forums: never place a new cache if any of your existing caches need maintenance or are disabled (allowance if the disable is from circumstances beyond your control).

@Rebore - yes, log those DNFs...

"throwdown" I've never replaced a missing container on a cache that I had not already found.  If I replace at CO's request, not having already found it , I'll never log a find.  I've replaced  numbers of other COs containers, where I know that person.

I'm not especially friendly to non-cachers, but then I'm not especially friendly. Typically, I exchange the brief, acknowledging nod. 

I assume log date refers to log on the find on correct day, not, post logs ON the day of find. I no longer am so slow about logging, but there have been times in the past when I was more than a  year behind. I try to get the date right, but I'm not real precise. Month/Year maybe not so much day.  But the "found years ago" log, not back dated, among a string of current DNFs is annoying. Get the year right please.

Following the Cache Owners instructions such as "no stamps", "no stickers", etc...  Sorry, but the CO who wants to micro manage my signing behavior is apt to be disappointed ;-) I'll get some kinda sig on that log. 

[+NYPaddleCacher]

13 minutes ago, Joshism said:

3 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

There are many other reasons NOT to log the day you found the cache.  I know some cachers the are logging all there finds on the following Saturday, or at the end of the month.

Why would someone do this? Worried about being stalked?

It hasn't happened very often but there have been a few times when I found a cache and couldn't get access to the internet for a few days.

[+justintim1999]

When ever possible I try to apply the Golden Rule to everything I do.   

As it pertains to Geocaching ask yourself "If this were my cache or my travel bug or my property how would I like others to treat them?"  

[+L0ne.R]

1 hour ago, Isonzo Karst said:

If I replace at CO's request, not having already found it , I'll never log a find.

I really like this self-geocaching rule. It should be within the guidelines.

[+L0ne.R]

 

As a hider:

I will never hide a micro size (under 100ml capacity) cache.

I will never hide a cache for the purpose of upping a smiley count.

We strive to hide a cache that provides a nice experience from beginning to end - from the cache page, to the location, to the cache container. 

 

I will always include a pen/pencil in the cache when I hide a cache (I try to put one in when I check our caches, but sometimes it's an impromptu check and I didn't bring one).

I will always put a logbook in our cache hides, never a logsheet.

I always monitor our caches and fix any within one month of a report. If we can't get to or fix the cache quickly, the cache will be disabled and monthly notes logged if, for example,  there's an ongoing issue like a frozen cache. The cache will be disabled immediately if it means the next finder will have an unpleasant, dangerous, or wasted experience: contents in terrible shape (burst bottle of bubble juice), dead animal next to the cache, bees next to the cache, flooded trail.

When we get bored with maintaining/visiting a cache hide, we will retrieve it and archive it.

Edited November 14, 2017 by L0ne.R

[+Mausebiber]

Quote

Why would someone do this? Worried about being stalked?

One reason.  How about your reported sick at work and went geocaching.  Or you have a work schedule where you have your day off always on a Wednesday, if you always log all your finds on this day, someone might find out, that your house is unattended on Wednesdays.  I have seen cases, where people are logging "our second day of our vacation caching around this beautiful island", so everyone knows, you are not at home.  Another reason would be, if you are on the road to drive to a customer and you see a cache right next to the road.  Is your boss willing to accept this 2 minute break?

Have fun, MB

[+J Grouchy]

2 hours ago, Isonzo Karst said:

"throwdown" I've never replaced a missing container on a cache that I had not already found.  If I replace at CO's request, not having already found it , I'll never log a find.  I've replaced  numbers of other COs containers, where I know that person.

Here it's tricky.  There are three scenarios:

1. I find the cache, but it's in bad shape and, at the owner's request, I replace it.  In this case, I'll log it as found because I actually found the cache.  This has happened to me maybe two or three times.

2. I do not find the cache and, at the owner's request, I replace it.  In this case, I do NOT log a find because I did not find the cache.  As my own personal rule, I do not do this.  Instead, I would log a DNF and, if the situation warrants it (like maybe I found a cap from a bison tube or an obvious piece of a damaged or missing cache), a Needs Maintenance log. 

3. I do not find the cache and take it upon myself to replace it without consulting the CO.  Well...this is pretty much against guidelines and would never do this (and have never done it).

[+thebruce0]

8 hours ago, niraD said:

10 hours ago, Inmountains said:

8.  Not doing a "throw down" without the COs permission.

If you have the CO's permission, then it isn't a throw down. But I would only replace a cache with specific permission, not with generic "I don't want DNFs, so throw down a film canister" permission like some numbers trail owners give.

And even with the CO permission it could potentially still cause a problem since the CO hasn't guaranteed the new replacement is exactly as they want it, or (necessarily) that the old container isn't actually still there. It really depends on the confidence of the CO that the finder's report is completely accurate.  Ultimately, if the CO allows a replacement at that moment, they should do their best to get down there to 'maintain' it first hand and verify it to be found as per the listing.  But yeah, I'd also argue that a replacement with CO permission isn't a "throwdown" in the negative sense.

And that also relates to logging a find on it. Technically your replacement isn't first-hand CO approved, so did you actually find the cache-placed-by-the-CO, or did you find a cache you put in place until the CO can approve their cache status?  But this is another case of "whether the CO lets you". In most cases, if the CO lets me log it, I will; but those are only cases where I feel like since the CO allows my find, then the only difference between the cache in place now and the 1st-hand-CO-approved cache is a minor technicality that affects no one's but my own conscience. I'll certainly decline logging a find on some caches the CO allows me to if I fell like the intended experience has not been achieved (such as, wanting to see the proper container!)

--

Golden rule, as it were, definitely. "Everyone caches their own way" is not the golden rule, and I'm increasingly detesting that phrase when someone does something someone else doesn't like. That ethic opens the door to "I cache this way and you can't stop me" and can even imply "you are to be mocked for disagreeing with or trying to stop me" (and oh yes, this sentiment is rampant on social media especially in closed circles when someone complains about the way another caches and there's a pile-on attitude supporting the opinion of the poster). Caching your own way only goes as far as your caching negatively affects others'.

• First, if it's against guidelines, don't do it (else that could end the experience immediately)
• Second, if my actions affect someone else's experience in a potentially bad way, I'll certainly make every effort to accomodate (if everyone did this there'd be no arbitrary disputes)
• Thirdly, I won't violate my own conscience (the prior two points are already covered)
• Lastly, have fun! (yep, that's the last - chances are, abiding by all of the above will actually enhance this last point)

Anything else is, essentially, free game.

[+Mausebiber]

10 minutes ago, J Grouchy said:

2. I do not find the cache and, at the owner's request, I replace it.

I'm not sure if I understand this right.  If I'm out caching and don't find cache, I go on and later this day, when I'm home I log the DNF.  At what point in time would the CO request to replace the cache?

 

[+thebruce0]

7 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:

I'm not sure if I understand this right.  If I'm out caching and don't find cache, I go on and later this day, when I'm home I log the DNF.  At what point in time would the CO request to replace the cache?

Quite often people who know the CO will contact them while out at gz. Usually that results in a proxy-replacement condoned by the CO, because friends. That may be the most common example of "I don't find the cache and at the owner's request I replace it".

[+J Grouchy]

22 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Quite often people who know the CO will contact them while out at gz. Usually that results in a proxy-replacement condoned by the CO, because friends. That may be the most common example of "I don't find the cache and at the owner's request I replace it".

This.  I've seen logs to this effect.

Example:

 

[+Mausebiber]

26 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

That may be the most common example

Understood, thanks.

[+L0ne.R]

49 minutes ago, J Grouchy said:

This.  I've seen logs to this effect.

Example:

 

Yeah. That happens a lot around here. There could be a string of DNFs and no action from the owner while s/he waits for a throwdown or "replacement".

They are supposed to go check that throwdown. They never do.

Once, I 'watched' a cache --- string of DNFs, NMs, NA, Reviewer Disable, throwdown, owner OM. Then the reviewer disabled the cache again and asked the owner to check the throwdown. No reply from the CO. 2 months later reviewer archived. (I bet the cache owner and the throwdowner left the container to rot, no follow-up logs to say otherwise).

It renewed my faith in the system. If it weren't for the proactive reviewers in my area I would have quit in 2013/14--about the tipping point for me, when addicted hiders placed 100s of caches, saturated trails, parks, roads then never maintained them, and throwdowns started to become the norm.

 

Edited November 14, 2017 by L0ne.R
fixed mistake

[+NanCycle]

Pretty much everything Inmountains said, except #5.  I prefer not to interact with muggles at all and usually will be as brief as possible without being downright rude.

As for #1, I have 1 "Find " that my husband found for me,  even though I had told him not to.   But since he thought he was doing me a favor, I thought I'd better accept it.

[+J Grouchy]

1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

Yeah. That happens a lot around here. There could be a string of DNFs and no action from the owner while s/he waits for a throwdown or "replacement".

They are supposed to go check that throwdown. They never do.

Once, I 'watched' a cache --- string of DNFs, NMs, NA, Reviewer Disable, throwdown, owner OM. Then the reviewer disabled the cache again and asked the owner to check the throwdown. No reply from the CO. 2 months later reviewer archived. (I bet the cache owner and the throwdowner left the container to rot, no follow-up logs to say otherwise).

It renewed my faith in the system. If it weren't for the proactive reviewers in my area I would have quit in 2013/14--about the tipping point for me, when addicted hiders placed 100s of caches, saturated trails, parks, roads then never maintained them, and throwdowns started to become the norm.

 

Yeah...there was more to that example.  One person called them out and the CO even got defensive about it.  It's all rather silly.

 

 

[+thebruce0]

1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

Yeah. That happens a lot around here. There could be a string of DNFs and no action from the owner while s/he waits for a throwdown or "replacement".

They are supposed to go check that throwdown. They never do.

Yep, and that can be problematic. As a CO, if I permit someone to place a replacement, I'll make sure to get out there ASAP to verify it as it should be. I have no guarantee, even if instructed over the phone, that the replacement is as I want it to be. I may also find when I get there that I might want to change it up because gz isn't the same as it was originally. Any number of reasons. So yeah, even a CO-permitted replacement shouldn't be considered 100% approved until the CO has performed a proper maintenance. But, if the CO is ok with the replacement, then I'd say it's certainly 'findable' - that is on the CO.

 

You could say, ideally, IF you are one to put a replacement with permission, then if your process is to log the find you should also drop a NM log afterwards so 1) others know the cache isn't yet checked first-hand and 2) the owner will be nudged to do proper maintenance on a cache with a known issue.  Ideally

Edited November 14, 2017 by thebruce0

[+Rebore]

2 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

One reason.  How about your reported sick at work and went geocaching.  Or you have a work schedule where you have your day off always on a Wednesday, if you always log all your finds on this day, someone might find out, that your house is unattended on Wednesdays.  I have seen cases, where people are logging "our second day of our vacation caching around this beautiful island", so everyone knows, you are not at home.  Another reason would be, if you are on the road to drive to a customer and you see a cache right next to the road.  Is your boss willing to accept this 2 minute break?

Have fun, MB

Good grief!

Do you really believe that someone who wants to break into your house is monitoring your GC profile? Or that your boss has nothing better to do than that? Considering the pixaleted houses on Google Streetview in Germany, I fear the answer might be yes.

Hint for the paranoid cachers: You don't have to log online.

[+Inmountains]

Thank you for all the answers.  Let me give an example.  I made three trips and was unsuccessful on finding a cache and put a new container there, BUT DID NOT LOG the FIND.  I emailed the owner when I got home and he asked me to NOT leave a new cache so I went out the next day and removed the cache I placed.  Two more trips back and I eventually found the cache, first find in over 3 years of the cache and it has NOT been found since (about 6 months ago).  As for the FIND DATE, I am not talking about the actual day you found the cache it should be logged.  Many of us don't get to logging for days, weeks, months and even years later.  I started in 2002 and could go on a cache and log that I found it December 1, 2002.  As for being on vacation, just wait till you get home and then log the cache on the date you found it.  People are worried that a thief is reading logs on caches, and while possible, I think it is rare.  And even if a thief did read your found log, how does he know where you live by your Geocaching Profile?  People worried that their boss is reading found logs on every cache in the county, highly unlikely (unless they are a cacher too).  The thing that I feel is dishonorable is for a cacher to do a Power Trail on January 1, find 365 caches, and then log one find for every day of the year without every going out again that year.  I mean, what is the point?  Filling in a day here or there due to an extreme circumstance such as a death, a funeral, surgery, etc...  can be understood.  My first attempt at a streak was interrupted by Dental Surgery where I had 4 implants, so my streak ended as I was in extreme pain for over a week.  I could have cheated, but I would only be cheating myself.  And that is my point, WHY cheat yourself?

By the way, great responses from everyone, thank you!

[+bflentje]

12 hours ago, niraD said:

I replace everything the way I found it. The only exception is when something is obviously out of place (e.g., an ammo can I found sitting in the middle of the trail) or when I've done minor maintenance as a favor to the CO (e.g., adding a supplemental log sheet). I've had to tell cache owners where I found their caches because someone had hidden them "better" than they found them.

This. Without a doubt.

[+niraD]

2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

You could say, ideally, IF you are one to put a replacement with permission, then if your process is to log the find you should also drop a NM log afterwards so 1) others know the cache isn't yet checked first-hand and 2) the owner will be nudged to do proper maintenance on a cache with a known issue.  Ideally

Many of the times when I've seen this happen, a group has planned a long hike in a public forum, and the CO has asked them to replace a damaged container. Find the damaged container, replace it with the new one that you packed in, and log as found: There's no problem.

If the cache was actually missing, then those in the group who have already found it can verify that it is no longer there and replace it. The others can find the replacement. Of course, that doesn't mean that the container hasn't migrated, and the previous finders just didn't find the migrated container. But I've seen that happen with cache owners too, where a particular location had multiple owner-placed replacements, sometimes in addition to the original container. It happens. No biggie.

[+J Grouchy]

3 hours ago, Inmountains said:

 I made three trips and was unsuccessful on finding a cache and put a new container there, BUT DID NOT LOG the FIND.  I emailed the owner when I got home and he asked me to NOT leave a new cache so I went out the next day and removed the cache I placed.  Two more trips back and I eventually found the cache, first find in over 3 years of the cache and it has NOT been found since (about 6 months ago). 

Your example is one reason to never leave a throwdown (which is what you did).  You don't know that it's not actually there if you don't find it...with few exceptions, such as when no doubt is given as to it's intended hiding spot and container.

[+Inmountains]

6 hours ago, J Grouchy said:

Your example is one reason to never leave a throwdown (which is what you did).  You don't know that it's not actually there if you don't find it...with few exceptions, such as when no doubt is given as to it's intended hiding spot and container.

Since the cacher was a personal friend, I knew he wouldn't mind me trying to help as i have replaced several other caches for him, AFTER getting his permission.  I made an error in a very difficultly hidden cache and rectified it in less than 24 hours.  We all make errors from time to time, the question is, do we try to correct those errors when they are pointed out.

[+L0ne.R]

7 minutes ago, Inmountains said:

i have replaced several other caches for him

Are you sure you're not enabling poor ownership habits? Does this cacher ever maintain his own caches? Does this cacher continue to hide caches despite having caches in need of maintenance?

[+Mausebiber]

On 11/14/2017 at 5:43 PM, Rebore said:

Considering the pixaleted houses on Google Streetview in Germany, I fear the answer might be yes

Quite interesting that you know so much about the houses here in Germany and that you react so "strange" about some security concerns. Am I getting into your "business" ?

Never mind, back to the topics.

[+Rebore]

38 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:

Quite interesting that you know so much about the houses here in Germany and that you react so "strange" about some security concerns. Am I getting into your "business" ?

Google didn't even start to map Austria because of the complaints from Germany, that's why I remember this. For me it's like the security theater at airports. It does nothing to improve security, but it's kind of a "there, there" reacton.

Edited November 16, 2017 by Rebore

[+baer2006]

On 11/14/2017 at 5:48 PM, Inmountains said:

Let me give an example.  I made three trips and was unsuccessful on finding a cache and put a new container there, BUT DID NOT LOG the FIND.  I emailed the owner when I got home and he asked me to NOT leave a new cache so I went out the next day and removed the cache I placed.  Two more trips back and I eventually found the cache, first find in over 3 years of the cache and it has NOT been found since (about 6 months ago).

Thank you. This is an excellent example why I would never place a throw-down. You can never be sure if the cache is really gone. There are example where even the owner was mistaken, and someone found the original cache after the owner placed a new one .

Also, great caching ethics on your side, going back and removing your throw-down.

Quote

People worried that their boss is reading found logs on every cache in the county, highly unlikely (unless they are a cacher too).

If you call in sick for work, but go caching anyway and don't want your boss to know, you cheat on your boss and co-workers. Compared to that, false logging on geocaching.com is a negligible sin .

 

Quote

The thing that I feel is dishonorable is for a cacher to do a Power Trail on January 1, find 365 caches, and then log one find for every day of the year without every going out again that year.  I mean, what is the point?  Filling in a day here or there due to an extreme circumstance such as a death, a funeral, surgery, etc...  can be understood.

Actually, I can't understand it. Sorry, but the point of a "streak" is to say "I went for a cache on every single day of the streak" and not "I went for a cache almost on every day". The latter is not a streak - period. Of course, cheating is easy, and the chances that you get called out are essentially zero. It's still cheating, and it's definitely one of my "self geocaching rules" to log each find on the day I actually found the cache (or were at the location of a virtual or EC).

 

[+L0ne.R]

3 hours ago, baer2006 said:

If you call in sick for work, but go caching anyway and don't want your boss to know, you cheat on your boss and co-workers. Compared to that, false logging on geocaching.com is a negligible sin .

1

Not necessarily. There's more and  more research that shows that taking a much needed mental health day (which may include getting outdoors and getting some nature-therapy) can help the mind & body and also increase productivity at work. As long as it's not abused, it may be productive.

Also you're in Germany where you get 6 weeks annual vacation. U.S. law does not require employers to grant any vacation.

Quote

Actually, I can't understand it. Sorry, but the point of a "streak" is to say "I went for a cache on every single day of the streak" and not "I went for a cache almost on every day". The latter is not a streak - period. Of course, cheating is easy, and the chances that you get called out are essentially zero. It's still cheating, and it's definitely one of my "self geocaching rules" to log each find on the day I actually found the cache (or were at the location of a virtual or EC).

1

It's human nature.

One incentive is streak challenge caches. It's amazing what people will do when there's an incentive involved (get a smiley, get a souvenir, get a challenge cache, win a game, pass a test, etc.)

That's why Groundspeak needs to stay a few steps ahead of the extreme likelihood that people will "cheat" and possibly ruin the game/pastime for others.

Edited November 16, 2017 by L0ne.R
closed the bracket

[+Inmountains]

On 11/14/2017 at 6:57 PM, L0ne.R said:

Are you sure you're not enabling poor ownership habits? Does this cacher ever maintain his own caches? Does this cacher continue to hide caches despite having caches in need of maintenance?

This is a very good cache hider and good cache maintainer.  I think he has passed 500 hides and NO power trails.  He archives them when he needs to.  The only time I have replaced a cache for him is when I am able to get a hold of him, talk to him about where the cache is supposed to be, and then I OFFER to replace it if it is missing.  Sometimes he says 'no', that he will replace it, but occasionally he gives me the go ahead and says 'thank you.'  My Geocaching enjoyment has gone up 1,000% since I really started to work well with others.  Just yesterday, I got a call from a cacher who was on the phone with another cacher, about a cache she couldn't find that I found in 2012.  I was just a couple of miles away and drove over and helped her find the cache (it was on the way to my bank any way).  Helping folks find caches, helping folks maintain caches and enjoying the camaraderie of caching, why is any of that a 'bad' thing?

[+L0ne.R]

1 hour ago, Inmountains said:

I think he has passed 500 hides

We have a guy like that. He had over 500 active hides. Mostly pill bottles. Maintained them reasonably well, although occasionally the maintenance plan was -- archive them when they accumulated some DNFs. Then one day, he archived them all. Gave no reason why. No mention of retrieving all of those caches. Then he started over. Now he's up to 250 active caches.

We have another guy who has over 1500 active hides. If you want to hide a cache within 50kms of his location, good luck finding a spot. His maintenance plan is mostly to thank those many geocaching friends who carry throwdowns to replace any of his caches that go missing. 

Anyone with 500+ active hides isn't necessarily a good cache hider. They are prolific, probably addicted. They unfairly take over areas leaving little room for others to enjoy cache ownership. They are unable to maintain that many caches, rarely check those caches, and rely on others to "help". 

[+baer2006]

5 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

One incentive is streak challenge caches. It's amazing what people will do when there's an incentive involved (get a smiley, get a souvenir, get a challenge cache, win a game, pass a test, etc.)

I know the incentives, and that some cachers would go to great lengths to get a single more smiley on a "special" cache. But are streak challenges so special, that you have to cheat to get them? In my area there are quite a few of them, and lots of other challenges which I will never meet. And yet they only make a small fraction of my Ignore List. Geocaching is still a game, and in the end getting a smiley or not doesn't change anything for the rest of your life. You mention "pass a test" as a cheating scenario, and I can completely understand that. There a many tests in your life, which are super-important once-in-a-lifetime situations, where your whole future can depend on the outcome. Yes, I can fully understand if someone uses extreme "result oriented strategies" (i.e. cheating ) for them (I did so, too). But in a game like geocaching, without any material gains or losses? In the end, the problem is perhaps the inability of some to admit a "failure" - not fulfilling a challenge (-> cheat), not finding a cache (-> don't log DNF and/or leave throw-downs).

[+baer2006]

5 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

Not necessarily. There's more and  more research that shows that taking a much needed mental health day (which may include getting outdoors and getting some nature-therapy) can help the mind & body and also increase productivity at work. As long as it's not abused, it may be productive.

Also you're in Germany where you get 6 weeks annual vacation. U.S. law does not require employers to grant any vacation.

Ok, I see your point. But I refuse to feel guilty for German law having a lot more employee rights than US law . And for the record, the actual minimum annual vacation here is 4 weeks (20 working days). But frankly I'm a bit shocked to hear that you don't have any guaranteed vacation at all (I thought it was, like, 2 weeks or so).

[+4wheeler]

Here is another good rule.  Never criticize another cacher for breaking one of your own rules.  They only apply to you and no one else.  Everyone else plays by their own rules.

Edited November 17, 2017 by 4wheeler

[+L0ne.R]

1 hour ago, baer2006 said:

Yes, I can fully understand if someone uses extreme "result oriented strategies" (i.e. cheating ) for them (I did so, too). But in a game like geocaching, without any material gains or losses? In the end, the problem is perhaps the inability of some to admit a "failure" - not fulfilling a challenge (-> cheat), not finding a cache (-> don't log DNF and/or leave throw-downs).

It is fascinating, isn't it? Such odd yet prevalent behavior ("cheating" for smileys and stretching the definition of a find to claim a smiley--throwdowns; finding caches but logging them on different days to  be allowed one covetted smiley; claiming finds on caches not found or seen; etc.) Then again, why do people feel compelled to game a system? There must be something very psychologically rewarding.

I found this wiki entry on Gaming the System interesting:

 

Quote

 

Internet

See also: Hacker (computer security)

Designers of online communities are explicitly warned that whenever one creates a system for managing a community, someone will try to work it to their advantage.^[7] Accordingly, they are advised from the start to think like a bad guy and to consider what behaviors they are unintentionally encouraging by creating some new social rules for the community.^[8]

 

 

[+Pezdude]

As a personal geocaching rule, I have not, nor do I have plans to, make any of my caches Premium Member Only. I have nothing against those who hide premium caches and I can understand their reasoning behind it. However, where I live, I have had no reason (knock on wood) to hide my caches behind a pay-wall or any other method that limits an interested user from searching for it.

Again, this is just my own personal rule. 

Edited November 18, 2017 by Pezdude

[+thebruce0]

On 11/16/2017 at 7:45 PM, 4wheeler said:

Here is another good rule.  Never criticize another cacher for breaking one of your own rules.  They only apply to you and no one else.  Everyone else plays by their own rules.

*erk*.  I agree with this - but that last sentence is quite often taken to extremes.  Within Groundspeak's rules everyone plays by their own rules. But even then, that sentiment is often used to justify behaviour that annoys, frustrates, angers, or hurts others.  Often it's accompanied by "Well if it bothers you then it's your fault, and you should learn to just let it go." That does not help produce a healthy, thriving community, and as it stands that geocaching cliche needs to go, IMO.

[+dprovan]

2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

*erk*.  I agree with this - but that last sentence is quite often taken to extremes.  Within Groundspeak's rules everyone plays by their own rules. But even then, that sentiment is often used to justify behaviour that annoys, frustrates, angers, or hurts others.  Often it's accompanied by "Well if it bothers you then it's your fault, and you should learn to just let it go." That does not help produce a healthy, thriving community, and as it stands that geocaching cliche needs to go, IMO.

Yeah, good point. GS has rules that govern geocaching. They neither define nor overrule the standards of being a decent human being.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

3 hours ago, dprovan said:

5 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

*erk*.  I agree with this - but that last sentence is quite often taken to extremes.  Within Groundspeak's rules everyone plays by their own rules. But even then, that sentiment is often used to justify behaviour that annoys, frustrates, angers, or hurts others.  Often it's accompanied by "Well if it bothers you then it's your fault, and you should learn to just let it go." That does not help produce a healthy, thriving community, and as it stands that geocaching cliche needs to go, IMO.

Yeah, good point. GS has rules that govern geocaching. They neither define nor overrule the standards of being a decent human being.

I don't play bey Self Geocaching Rules, but I try to follow some basic Self Geocaching Guidelines.  

[+JL_HSTRE]

My personal geo-rules:

1. Always log the Find with the date I found the cache. I might not log for a week or two because I'm on vacation, but I will accurately backdate the log when I write it. One exception I can think of is There At Placement finds, which I log the same day as FTF (but do not claim FTF credit).

2. If I found the cache then I found the cache. I will sign where I can, but I will not agonize for a moment about my find because of the condition of the logsheet or container, nor go to wacky contortions (blood, mud, sap) to sign. There are some clear special situations (puzzle boxes, combo locks, tree climbers) where an extra step is absolutely required and I will act accordingly for those caches.

3. If I didn't find the cache then I didn't find the cache. I've logged alot of DNFs, many on caches that were still there. I'm infamously bad at palm tree boots and GRIMs. Not coincidentally I wear rather thick glasses.

I have bent this a few times with CO approved replacement caches, always as part of a group and usually involving a known DNF history with detailed hide info from the CO.

5. Corollary to 1 & 4: With regard to the "not logging my throwdown" philosophy expressed by some and I assume some who believe in not logging There At Placement or other similar situations - any cache I've "got" is either Owned or Found by me. If there were some other category I would be happy to put it there instead, but I only have the two to choose from.

6. I don't do driving power trails.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Joshism

[+Mausebiber]

On 11/17/2017 at 1:45 AM, 4wheeler said:

Here is another good rule.  Never criticize another cacher for breaking one of your own rules.  They only apply to you and no one else.  Everyone else plays by their own rules.

My rule, and Groundspeak rule is, not to hide geocache in protected areas.  So, when I determine, that this rule is not respected, if someone else might think that’s there rule, I will criticize.
Whenever the acting or behaver of a fellow geocacher is affecting me or the geocacher community I will criticize.  The misbehaver of one can affect all of us.

[+fbingha]

1. Only log caches that I put my hand on.
2. Only log caches that I find and I believe are the accepted cache. This means, yes, I have logged caches that I know are throwdowns.
3. If I find a cache without a log, I will leave my signature on a scrap of paper. If I find just a log, no container, I do not log the cache.
4. I will never leave a throwdown. It exists in the realm of possibility that I might leave a replacement for a friend but I wouldn't log anything that I left.
5. Only record the log date as the actual date that I found the cache.

1. I delete logs that are left on my caches that are missing.
2. I don't leave my caches missing for long so #1 isn't really an issue.
3. I don't hide caches in places that I can't regularly check on them.
4. I don't hide inferior containers: hide a keys, pill bottles, altoids. I don't go cheap.
5. I realize most finders don't care about #4.

[medoug]

On 11/16/2017 at 2:57 PM, L0ne.R said:

We have a guy like that. He had over 500 active hides. Mostly pill bottles. Maintained them reasonably well, although occasionally the maintenance plan was -- archive them when they accumulated some DNFs. Then one day, he archived them all. Gave no reason why. No mention of retrieving all of those caches. Then he started over. Now he's up to 250 active caches.

We have another guy who has over 1500 active hides. If you want to hide a cache within 50kms of his location, good luck finding a spot. His maintenance plan is mostly to thank those many geocaching friends who carry throwdowns to replace any of his caches that go missing. 

Anyone with 500+ active hides isn't necessarily a good cache hider. They are prolific, probably addicted. They unfairly take over areas leaving little room for others to enjoy cache ownership. They are unable to maintain that many caches, rarely check those caches, and rely on others to "help". 

I've seen this before.  The name we have for them are "geohogs".  It's way better for cache hiders to focus on quality, rather than quantity.

[+TyroneShoelaces]

On 11/16/2017 at 10:00 AM, baer2006 said:

"It's still cheating, and it's definitely one of my "self geocaching rules" to log each find on the day I actually found the cache (or were at the location of a virtual or EC)."

 

This remains one of my top self rules since I was on a 3+ year streak that I ended this year.  In addition to being really anal about dates, I even took it a little further...

Regarding Earthcaches or Virtuals, I would always try to log a physical container on the days I did these, just in case a Virtual or EC owner did not like my answers and deleted my log.  I can remember ONE time when I found only a Virtual that day, and even then it made me nervous even though I knew the CO and the answers were pretty easy.

While I was streaking I would not "pre-sign" challenge caches that I didn't yet qualify for.  I didn't want there to be any question about which date I logged the find... was it the day I found it, or the day I qualified?  Again, there was ONE instance where I broke my own rule, a 5/5 island challenge cache that I found while out on the ice a few winters back.  I was with somebody else, it was hard to get there, so I signed it while there.  It was not my only find that day.  And then when I did finally qualify for the challenge and logged the smiley, I made sure I found another cache that same day, too.  I even drove to the area where that challenge was located for my other find, so that my mileage between caches didn't look odd.

Edited November 22, 2017 by TyroneShoelaces
formatting

[+Inmountains]

I use the term "rules" lightly.  Yes, they are "personal guidelines."  Some folks have very strict guidelines, some have very loose guidelines and most of us fall in between somewhere.  I guess it all comes down to personal integrity.

 

[+noncentric]

On 11/14/2017 at 8:24 AM, NanCycle said:

Pretty much everything Inmountains said, except #5.  I prefer not to interact with muggles at all and usually will be as brief as possible without being downright rude.

^This. I'd rather a muggle passes me by without asking me what I'm doing than to explain geocaching to them. Assuming they are not authority figures, like law enforcement or park rangers, than I'd rather tell them I'm taking a rest break than to say that I'm looking for a geocache - unless of course, they specifically ask "are you looking for a cache" or "are you geocaching".

 

On 11/14/2017 at 8:24 AM, NanCycle said:

As for #1, I have 1 "Find " that my husband found for me,  even though I had told him not to.   But since he thought he was doing me a favor, I thought I'd better accept it.

I had this happen once. I felt compelled to go out that night and find it myself, since I wanted the online log date to match the date in the physical log, and I didn't want to log it online unless I had actually found it.