Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
EmzyJanezy

Potentially Lying Geocachers

Recommended Posts

There's a new geocacher who I strongly suspect of lying or messing about.  They started today and have apparently found 9 caches.  I know that's not unheard of, but I was first suspicious when I saw they had found some I'd tried to find that had a long string of DNFS.  Then I noticed all their logs just say something like "hikjh" and "dkghd".

The reason I'm irked is that NM logs are going to be ignored now it will appear the long standing DNF caches have been finally found.

Should I just ignore it and mind my own business or is there something I should do about this?

I could include a link to this geocacher's profile if you like.  Just wasn't sure I should be naming and shaming on a public forum.

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, EmzyJanezy said:

[...] Should I just ignore it and mind my own business [...]

Yes, please.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, EmzyJanezy said:

...Then I noticed all their logs just say something like "hikjh" and "dkghd".

The reason I'm irked is that NM logs are going to be ignored now it will appear the long standing DNF caches have been finally found.

I wouldn't expect this to be an issue. Any reasonable person reading those logs would quickly question their validity and probably ignore them. If you really felt like it, you could send a message to the relevant COs letting them know that the log is potentially bogus, but I'm sure they'd reach that conclusion on their own.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

If you head out to those caches that the other newbie claims to have found, there may be footprints or other things disturbed which leads you to the cache. I have seen new cachers make difficult finds, sometimes because they don't have preconceived ideas of what they are searching for.

If you make the find, great!

 

Otherwise, there is not really anything you should do. The Cache Owner is responsible for dealing with possibly false logs.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, EmzyJanezy said:

There's a new geocacher who I strongly suspect of lying or messing about.  They started today and have apparently found 9 caches.  I know that's not unheard of, but I was first suspicious when I saw they had found some I'd tried to find that had a long string of DNFS.  Then I noticed all their logs just say something like "hikjh" and "dkghd".

 

 

Not worth the agro. Just ignore it.

Most likely its kids who have found the app on their phone.

Most cachers will see the gobbledygook text and should realize it's a bogus log.

Leave the new kids alone, they'll soon get fed up, and go and annoy/play somewhere else!

 

(It's the downside of a free game/free app. )

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks everybody.  

No need for further replies, bit worried I'm causing offence so will leave it here.

Share this post


Link to post

There's nothing offensive about being curious. Just ask them. They probably won't answer, or they might answer in such a vague way, you'll have your suspicions confirmed, and then you can just forget about it. But when someone leaves a log like "hikjh", I suspect they just don't realize there are other people involved, so you can teach them about the human element to geocaching. But don't start out by calling them a liar.

Share this post


Link to post

I had a look at the logs of this bogus logging cacher and it seems to me to be a kid muggle with an app. A few of the Finds were caches of the same CO who, although active, may not be monitoring their caches too closely  -  D1.5s with a  string of DNFs which, as mentioned above, now have a Found It. A casual CO may look at that and think its all good when all is not.

Edited by colleda
spelling

Share this post


Link to post

In addition, the Cache Health Score algorithm cannot distinguish between legit "found it" logs and "nonsense" logs such as the entries described.  So, the caches may not come to a Community Volunteer Reviewer's attention for action as quickly as they should.  There are false negatives in the Cache Health Score as well as the false positives that are the source of frequent complaints.  That is why the human touch* of a Reviewer is still needed when deciding whether to take action.

*Many Reviewers are dogs.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

This happens from time to time in our area.  9 caches probably wouldn't be cause for us to notice but it is often 50+.  I will notice because I have out a bunch of kayak/boat to caches and also puzzles.  I will get a bunch of logs in a day of just "found it" or something like you said.  I will know it is next to impossible to put in at all those places and find all those caches.  Also most will say more.  Then I look and see they also logged some really hard puzzles that they never certitude.  Then you will see they found some in other states on the same day.  Not sure why they do it but sometimes they do.

Share this post


Link to post

It's something that I just roll my eyes at.  If it's not my owned cache, then there isn't much I can do.

There is one local cacher that writes very short logs and 'finds' all the caches in their immediate area.  They've logged finds on caches that had a string of DNF's and are likely missing, caches behind construction fences, and extremely difficult puzzles. They even logged finds on their own hides, before the logging rules changed to disallow such 'finds'.  In a brief discussion with this cacher about one of the difficult puzzles that they 'solved', they all but admitted to the finds being false, saying that they liked to keep the map around their area "clear" of cache icons. Ugh. They were not interested in my explanation of the Ignore list. Not much more I can do.

Share this post


Link to post

Not all strange logs are fake though. There's a cacher here who only ever posts a single emoji character in their online logs and when I first saw it on one of my hides I was naturally suspicious, but they'd signed the logbook, carefully drawing that same emoji by hand, and were meticulous in replacing the cache exactly how it had been hidden. They've since found quite a few more of my hides and it's the same every time. To each their own, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post

The only reason it frustrates me is because they have found some of the caches I couldn't find that had a long string of DNFs.  I was watching these caches to see if anybody found the cache so I could go and have another look with the belief it was still live.  Logs such as the one this geocacher left could make us believe the cache is still waiting to be found when it has in fact gone.

I just took the "yes please" in response to me asking if I should mind my own business to be a little bit curt and therefore concerned people were going to be offended by my question and so decided it was best to leave it.

 

Edited by EmzyJanezy
spelling errors
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, EmzyJanezy said:

Logs such as the one this geocacher left could make us believe the cache is still waiting to be found when it has in fact gone.

I understand what you're saying. Many cachers say that "cachers that log false finds are only cheating themselves", but there is 'collateral damage' when those false finds give other cachers the perception that a cache has actually been found.

Besides false finds, I've felt the same way when I see cachers log a find dated 4/10/2018 with text that says "found this on 1/10/2018. just getting caught up on logging"  OR  "found this a few months ago, but forgot to log it".  With the former, if they know the exact date they found it, then I'd prefer they use the correct date, but I understand that the app doesn't allow date selection. With the latter, it's easy to recognize that they mean a few months before 4/10/2018. But if I look at the page next year, then I won't know if their log means they found it on 4/10/2018 and submitted their log in the fall, or if they submitted their log on 4/10/2018 and their find was a few months before that. If those caches have DNF's before these mis-dated Finds, then it becomes difficult to know the current state of the cache.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, EmzyJanezy said:

I just took the "yes please" in response to me asking if I should mind my own business to be a little bit curt and therefore concerned people were going to be offended by my question and so decided it was best to leave it.

Welcome to the forums :lol:

People here often speak plainly. Personally I don't really mind that as it makes it easier to debate points rather than wrapping everything in cotton wool. YMMV. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post

You will find that how longer you are caching the better you'll get in identifying real bogus logs. You will get to "know" cachers by seeing their logs all over the place. Although never meeting them, I know if I read a log by certain cachers that a multi is worth going for I'll put it on my "todo" list right away, I know if certain cachers log a DNF it may just be possible the cache is still there, from others I will know there's nothing to be found. Not all will be 100% but at least it will be a good indication. The same goes for CO's too, for some you know they have caches that have to be done, for others you just know the containers are nothing special (but sometimes the tour to get them them is a nice walk/hike/bikeride).

 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, EmzyJanezy said:

The only reason it frustrates me is because they have found some of the caches I couldn't find that had a long string of DNFs.  I was watching these caches to see if anybody found the cache so I could go and have another look with the belief it was still live.  Logs such as the one this geocacher left could make us believe the cache is still waiting to be found when it has in fact gone.

I just took the "yes please" in response to me asking if I should mind my own business to be a little bit curt and therefore concerned people were going to be offended by my question and so decided it was best to leave it.

 

I don't think that you were being offensive at all.  Here we have an enthusiastic new geocacher that went premium after only finding a few caches, that is engaging with the community through the forums but is quickly seeing the dark side of geocaching.  Although, as others have suggested there isn't anything you can do about the behavior of "muggles with an app" it happens often enough that I hope that the powers that be will take notice (and they're not going to take notice if the answer is just "ignore it") and consider ways that might prevent other new, enthusiasti,  geocachers from experiencing the dark side.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

Passive aggressive option:

Send 'em a message: "Hi! I see you logged XYZ cache. I spent a lot of time looking for it but couldn't find it. Would you be able to give me a hint as to where it is hidden? Thanks!" :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

I've done that, never got a reply. I wonder why. (cache was archived days later because it was gone).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I normally would say that it's partly on the CO for allowing these logs to stay...but as a cache owner, it's sort of a tough call. 

Way I break it down is this: 

1. if the cache gets a lot of visits and seems to be in decent shape, I'd probably not bother checking and not make an issue of it.  

2. if the cache gets a string of DNFs or is rarely visited, is a mystery or multi and therefore less likely to attract cachers such as this, I'd probably go check and delete if I didn't see their nicknames.

3. if I see their names show up on many caches in a short period of time, I'd probably just delete the logs and let them decide whether they want to make an issue out of it. I can only recall one such occasion where I did this and it was never challenged and the cache was never re-logged by the same individual.  

 

So yeah, I think COs are enablers of a sort, but I cut them slack in many instances when it seems like it's not worth making an issue of it.  I've let some of those kinds of logs stand simply because I didn't feel like there was any point in verifying.

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, Keystone said:

*Many Reviewers are dogs

Wait, I thought all reviewers were... who's not a dog?!

 

6 hours ago, EmzyJanezy said:

I was watching these caches to see if anybody found the cache so I could go and have another look with the belief it was still live.  Logs such as the one this geocacher left could make us believe the cache is still waiting to be found when it has in fact gone.

4 hours ago, noncentric said:

I understand what you're saying. Many cachers say that "cachers that log false finds are only cheating themselves", but there is 'collateral damage' when those false finds give other cachers the perception that a cache has actually been found.

Yes, this is the biggest problem with false finds. It's not so much about proactively stopping people from "cheating" as it is about whether any false logs are giving the wrong impression to other finders. That is the issue that, ideally, should be dealt with, and hopefully by the CO of the cache with false (or potentially false) logs. If the logs were posted a ways back and more recent logs are accurate, I'd shrug it off. But as a most recent, especially in the case you describe, that definitely seems more problematic.

As a finder, there's no much I can do except contact the CO. I was considering how to phrase what I'd recommend as a CO, but I think J Grouchy made the points well just above. Those are likely how I'd handle the situation too.

But at least as a finder, you can see the logs and make your own judgement about what you choose to do as a search, and hope the CO decides to clean up the history.

Share this post


Link to post

There's also the admittedly selfish aspect that, when I go looking for a "lonely cache", I like the online logs to be honest.  There have been a few occasions where I have had reason to question a logged find on a lonely cache when I don't see a signature and the online log is a simple "tftc" or other similar statement.  In my head I know the truth, but it would be nice to SEE it recorded correctly.  I don't really get wound up about it, but it's there in the back of my mind...pokin' at me.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, EmzyJanezy said:

The only reason it frustrates me is because they have found some of the caches I couldn't find that had a long string of DNFs.  I was watching these caches to see if anybody found the cache so I could go and have another look with the belief it was still live.  Logs such as the one this geocacher left could make us believe the cache is still waiting to be found when it has in fact gone.

You didn't say, but have the COs responded at all to the "long string" of DNFs or any NM logs you mentioned before these kids showed up?  

A response (or complete lack of...) by the CO is a good indicator whether you should even be interested anymore. No response by the CO during the "DNFs and NMs" would be my "irk".      :)

 You can simply ignore it (and if a few similar, maybe that CO's hides in general).   A couple silly kids maybe not the real issue... 

Edited by cerberus1
gramm errrrroorrrs

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, EmzyJanezy said:

There's a new geocacher who I strongly suspect of lying or messing about.  They started today and have apparently found 9 caches.  I know that's not unheard of, but I was first suspicious when I saw they had found some I'd tried to find that had a long string of DNFS.  Then I noticed all their logs just say something like "hikjh" and "dkghd".

For the record, last time I was out I found 10 caches in under 50 minutes in an urban area that is filled with snow. So find count is not something you can judge. Though, I usually write coherent logs ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, bflentje said:

For the record, last time I was out I found 10 caches in under 50 minutes in an urban area that is filled with snow. So find count is not something you can judge. Though, I usually write coherent logs ;-)

Yeah, I didn't think 9 was a lot for one day, it was just they were all found, some with long strings of DNF, and the logs all read the same way.  Made me think it was odd and wanted to come here to check if there was a procedure for dealing with it.  I'm new so still working out what I should report and what I should ignore.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:
17 hours ago, Keystone said:

*Many Reviewers are dogs

Wait, I thought all reviewers were... who's not a dog?!

(mrrroww)

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, EmzyJanezy said:

Yeah, I didn't think 9 was a lot for one day, it was just they were all found, some with long strings of DNF, and the logs all read the same way.  Made me think it was odd and wanted to come here to check if there was a procedure for dealing with it.  I'm new so still working out what I should report and what I should ignore.

Another aspect to the game, some of us go WAY out of our way to score caches like this.. to look for DNF'ed caches that no one else can find or lonely caches. I am one of those. Many times I fail but MANY times I am successful.

I think everyone else set you on track with not worrying about it since there's nothing you can do about it. My goal was just to point out that there are some of us that cache on a regular basis in what you found "concerning".

I am thinking you might need to harden up. And error on NOT "reporting" unless it is absolutely something that violates the guidelines or physically harms someone or something.

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, bflentje said:

I am thinking you might need to harden up. And error on NOT "reporting" unless it is absolutely something that violates the guidelines or physically harms someone or something.

Personally i would considering this sort of arm chair logging to be harmful (even though not physically) to the game itself.  When it's condoned it perpetuates a perception that a lack of integrity is acceptable in how the game is played.   So a geocacher approaches a land manager to ask for permission to place a cache in a park.  The land manager, may not know anything about the game and does a little research and what do they find?  That "some that cache on a regular basis" condone a lack of integrity in how the game is played.  Based on that limited research they deny the request to place a cache in the park.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, bflentje said:

For the record, last time I was out I found 10 caches in under 50 minutes in an urban area that is filled with snow. So find count is not something you can judge. Though, I usually write coherent logs ;-)

1 hour ago, bflentje said:

I think everyone else set you on track with not worrying about it since there's nothing you can do about it. My goal was just to point out that there are some of us that cache on a regular basis in what you found "concerning".

I may be wrong, but I think a big part of the concern in the OP was that it's a brand-new account logging these finds.  "new geocacher ... They started today"   A day-old account that's finding caches that more experienced cachers couldn't find, and writing incoherent logs, could seem concerning.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, EmzyJanezy said:

The only reason it frustrates me is because they have found some of the caches I couldn't find that had a long string of DNFs.  I was watching these caches to see if anybody found the cache so I could go and have another look with the belief it was still live.  Logs such as the one this geocacher left could make us believe the cache is still waiting to be found when it has in fact gone.

I just took the "yes please" in response to me asking if I should mind my own business to be a little bit curt and therefore concerned people were going to be offended by my question and so decided it was best to leave it.

 

You're doing fine. Exactly what I did when I started a month ago.

I don't remember the post or article, but there is one that suggests you put a watch on a cache you didn't find and see what happens. I did. 

I visited a cache twice and found nothing. Two days after my visit a guy crisscrossing Texas found 307 caches, including that one. 307 logs all the same, "Parked in a convenient location, made the short walk over and found it quickly."

The burnt part is that "short walk." It's 12 foot from the parking spot to the base of the monument. That's less of a walk than most people make from their bedroom to the kitchen! Yeah, that raised my suspicions and I checked his log and his route. That he logged 1340 miles in 4 days driving is totally believable except, that 1340 miles is as the crow flies. This person is taking detours, retracing their route, crossing over highways, traveling state roads, and backroads, with means the actual mileage would be closer to 1700. Logging 75 caches a day and stopping to sleep each night. I didn't find a single DNF log even though he would be within a mile (or less) of caches I know are in play. Neither did he log the two most popular caches in this area.

I got the impression that he pulled up, made the decision, "Yeah, that will be easy to find" and logged it found.

To give him credit, I concluded it was a mislog. With everything happening, it would be virtually impossible to remember every cache you find and did not find in that short, hurried time frame. So I went back the third time and located small smashed bit of black plastic that might have been a nano at one time but today is nothing more than bits and pieces of days gone by. The owner of this particular cache is no longer active and doesn't respond.

So it is what it is. Some people set lofty goals and the achievement of that goal is Job #1. Quantity comes before quality. And as long as the goal is achieved they are happy.

But don't be afraid to speak out on it. Databases don't get updated, necessary changes don't get made, and things continue to fall apart unless you, or I, or someone, does.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Personally i would considering this sort of arm chair logging to be harmful (even though not physically) to the game itself.  When it's condoned it perpetuates a perception that a lack of integrity is acceptable in how the game is played.   So a geocacher approaches a land manager to ask for permission to place a cache in a park.  The land manager, may not know anything about the game and does a little research and what do they find?  That "some that cache on a regular basis" condone a lack of integrity in how the game is played.  Based on that limited research they deny the request to place a cache in the park.

 

And we lose players based on the lack of integrity. The logs can't be trusted. 

We don't promote the game because of the lack of integrity. I don't tell anyone about it anymore and if asked I tell people that a large part of why I don't participate anymore, both as a finder and hider, is the lack of integrity. 

Edited by L0ne.R
typo
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

And we lose players based on the lack of integrity. The logs can't be trusted. 

We don't promote the game because of the lack of integrity. I don't tell anyone about it anymore and if asked I tell people that a large part of why I don't participate anymore, both as and finder and hider, is the lack of integrity. 

So, instead of promoting the game, you're bashing it - telling people that the hobby lacks integrity?  Do you even concede to them that most cachers are fine, upstanding citizens of the game, or do you just paint the vast majority of cachers as unscrupulous?

 

18 minutes ago, garyo1954 said:

To give him credit, I concluded it was a mislog. With everything happening, it would be virtually impossible to remember every cache you find and did not find in that short, hurried time frame.

Just wanted to mention, in regards to keeping track of finds/dnfs for caching days.  Many cachers use "Drafts" (formerly known as "Field Notes") to keep track of the caches they attempt. The functionality is included on GPSr's and most geocaching phone apps and allows a cacher to hit a few buttons after navigating to a cache to record whether they found/dnf it. They can even include text notes about that cache if they want. Then later, they upload those records to the website and/or a 3rd party application to flesh out the notes and post their finds.

Of course, there are still some cachers that use memory or pen/paper to keep track of their caching activity. Logging errors would be more likely using such methods.

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, noncentric said:

Do you even concede to them that most cachers are fine, upstanding citizens of the game

Is that the case?

Was there a survey or census of some sort?

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/16/2018 at 1:15 PM, EmzyJanezy said:

There's a new geocacher who I strongly suspect of lying or messing about.  They started today and have apparently found 9 caches.  I know that's not unheard of, but I was first suspicious when I saw they had found some I'd tried to find that had a long string of DNFS.  Then I noticed all their logs just say something like "hikjh" and "dkghd".

The reason I'm irked is that NM logs are going to be ignored now it will appear the long standing DNF caches have been finally found.

Should I just ignore it and mind my own business or is there something I should do about this?

I could include a link to this geocacher's profile if you like.  Just wasn't sure I should be naming and shaming on a public forum.

I found the cacher in question and not all of his logs are gibberish.  One actually says "I found it" and another says "I am so good."  I suggest you return to some of the suspect caches that you did find and see if his sig is on the log.  

If some of the caches he logged are actually missing, the DNFs will start to pile up again, and his logs will likely find their way into the "Found It = Didn't Find It" thread.

The caches that you DNF'd that also have some previous DNF's, it might be a good idea to post NM on them.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, noncentric said:

So, instead of promoting the game, you're bashing it - telling people that the hobby lacks integrity?  Do you even concede to them that most cachers are fine, upstanding citizens of the game, or do you just paint the vast majority of cachers as unscrupulous?

 

Just wanted to mention, in regards to keeping track of finds/dnfs for caching days.  Many cachers use "Drafts" (formerly known as "Field Notes") to keep track of the caches they attempt. The functionality is included on GPSr's and most geocaching phone apps and allows a cacher to hit a few buttons after navigating to a cache to record whether they found/dnf it. They can even include text notes about that cache if they want. Then later, they upload those records to the website and/or a 3rd party application to flesh out the notes and post their finds.

Of course, there are still some cachers that use memory or pen/paper to keep track of their caching activity. Logging errors would be more likely using such methods.

We're on the same page. I suspect that what happened was...

 He pulls up, sees the monument, base and the only thing sitting on it and hits the FOUND button. Maybe he did look and didn't find it and forgot to change it.

I confess to doing the same without intent, being new to using a GPSr. And I don't even know of you can change a Found to a DNF in a GPSr??? But I hand log everything in any event which is much easier on me since I'm just out for the exercise and fresh air forgetting all about numbers.

I dare say, after three trips, I could take Inspector Gadget out with no result. I say that with some confidence after picking up every nail, screw and bit of material, kicking and moving rocks, running my hand over, under, around, and in every crevice and crack that might hide a log. I say that after trying to contact the owner and getting no response. And a followup with the last person to have located another of his caches revealed the owner had allowed that a certain cache was muggled and he would not be replacing it (although that cache is listed as active as of this posting).

On the local level, one missing cache seems like nothing, but being conservative if there is 1 missing in every county in the US it comes to 3007.

What if it's 1 of 100 missing? That's 25,000 missing.

It might be the area I live in, but sadly, I just don't see this rosy picture of a fun outdoor activity happening here. What I see is people abandoning their caches, leaving the game, and expecting the community to continue to oversee their living legacy. Or they could care less if the cache is there tomorrow.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Team Microdot said:
1 hour ago, noncentric said:

Do you even concede to them that most cachers are fine, upstanding citizens of the game

Is that the case?

Was there a survey or census of some sort?

Was there a survey or census of some sort to show that most cachers lack integrity?

---------------------

I was not making a factual statement. I was asking someone, not you, to expand on how they describe the hobby to others.  " Do you even concede to them that most cachers are fine, upstanding citizens of the game, or do you just paint the vast majority of cachers as unscrupulous? "

My question was whether a concession was made about a belief by the person making the statements. If someone believes that most cachers are fine, upstanding citizens of the game, then they might say something like "There are some cachers that lack integrity, but most cachers are good/honest/etc people and try to keep geocaching fun"  vs  Someone that believes most cachers lack integrity, then they might say something like "There isn't any integrity in geocaching. Most of the cachers are bad/dishonest/etc people that make geocaching un-fun."

The majority of the cachers I've met and/or know about are fine geocachers that are out to have fun, share the fun with others with their hides, and are not trying to 'cheat' their way through the hobby. I believe that "most" cachers are like this. Since that's what I believe, then I would not tell people that geocaching lacks integrity.

------------------------

Guess I just don't understand why people would bother to regularly participate in a forum about an activity that they don't enjoy, or that they think is so lacking in integrity that it's not worth participating in. If I felt that way about an activity, then I wouldn't spend my time regularly discussing it. But that's just me. If others feel differently, then bully for them.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

And we lose players based on the lack of integrity. The logs can't be trusted. 

We don't promote the game because of the lack of integrity. I don't tell anyone about it anymore and if asked I tell people that a large part of why I don't participate anymore, both as and finder and hider, is the lack of integrity. 

There's the problem. You can't offer any positive opinion or advice on geocaching as you no longer participate in it and are apathetic towards it. Why haunt a geocaching forum? 

In response to the original question. 

Just worry about 'your' geocaching and not bother with anyone else's and you'll be a lot happier.

Edited by The Magna Defender
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, noncentric said:

Was there a survey or census of some sort to show that most cachers lack integrity?

---------------------

I was not making a factual statement. I was asking someone, not you, to expand on how they describe the hobby to others.  " Do you even concede to them that most cachers are fine, upstanding citizens of the game, or do you just paint the vast majority of cachers as unscrupulous? "

My question was whether a concession was made about a belief by the person making the statements. If someone believes that most cachers are fine, upstanding citizens of the game, then they might say something like "There are some cachers that lack integrity, but most cachers are good/honest/etc people and try to keep geocaching fun"  vs  Someone that believes most cachers lack integrity, then they might say something like "There isn't any integrity in geocaching. Most of the cachers are bad/dishonest/etc people that make geocaching un-fun."

The majority of the cachers I've met and/or know about are fine geocachers that are out to have fun, share the fun with others with their hides, and are not trying to 'cheat' their way through the hobby. I believe that "most" cachers are like this. Since that's what I believe, then I would not tell people that geocaching lacks integrity.

------------------------

Guess I just don't understand why people would bother to regularly participate in a forum about an activity that they don't enjoy, or that they think is so lacking in integrity that it's not worth participating in. If I felt that way about an activity, then I wouldn't spend my time regularly discussing it. But that's just me. If others feel differently, then bully for them.

I'll agree with you.

In some areas caches is in good health with few problems, floating right along. In other areas, it is pretty much hitting the rocks, taking on water, and may well sink, if it hasn't already. And there is the Sargasso sea where nothing is happening.

The local area is our first exposure to caching and often paints our picture of overall game. With a bad experience the picture is just a bad doodle; a good experience leaves an awesome doodle (a Picasso doodle).

I pray that people aren't inherently bad, but only circumstances and misinterpretation make it seem so.

Unfortunately, we have to accept there are a share who cheat because, "Everyone else is doing it....."



 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, The Magna Defender said:

Xx

Edited by EmzyJanezy
Misunderstanding. Maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, noncentric said:

So, instead of promoting the game, you're bashing it - telling people that the hobby lacks integrity?  Do you even concede to them that most cachers are fine, upstanding citizens of the game, or do you just paint the vast majority of cachers as unscrupulous?

I mostly tell people that I don't enjoy the pastime much anymore. Most caches are abandoned and in rough shape. The culture has changed from a family-friendly leisure activity to a competitive leadership-board type of game, where quantity over quality dominates. The dry, family-friendly container owned by an active owner who checks and maintains it regularly cannot be easily found using the current tools.  Is there anything I've said that isn't the reality of the current state of geocaching?

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

I mostly tell people that I don't enjoy the pastime much anymore. Most caches are abandoned and in rough shape. The culture has changed from a family-friendly leisure activity to a competitive leadership-board type of game, where quantity over quality dominates. The dry, family-friendly container owned by an active owner who checks and maintains it regularly cannot be easily found using the current tools.  Is there anything I've said that isn't the reality of the current state of geocaching?

Umm.. yeah, "most".

Your experience, perhaps. But you present it as if you know for a fact that this is everyone's experience. That IS detrimental to the game. Nay, hobby.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, thebruce0 said:
5 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

I mostly tell people that I don't enjoy the pastime much anymore. Most caches are abandoned and in rough shape. The culture has changed from a family-friendly leisure activity to a competitive leadership-board type of game, where quantity over quality dominates. The dry, family-friendly container owned by an active owner who checks and maintains it regularly cannot be easily found using the current tools.  Is there anything I've said that isn't the reality of the current state of geocaching?

Umm.. yeah, "most".

Your experience, perhaps. But you present it as if you know for a fact that this is everyone's experience. That IS detrimental to the game. Nay, hobby.

Might be rather than IS?

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

Might be rather than IS?

If one person is deterred from enjoyed it solely because of a negative opinion, then yes, the opinion is.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, thebruce0 said:
7 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

Might be rather than IS?

If one person is deterred from enjoyed it solely because of a negative opinion, then yes, it is.

But we don't know if that's the case -_-

So - uncomplimentary? Definitely.

Detrimental? We don't know.

Share this post


Link to post

As already written in many other threads, there are still a lot of "good" caches around but it takes a lot of work to find them. I keep several up-to date GSAK databases and spend a lot of time going through listings/logs and I use macro's to get favorite count/percentages. This way I tag caches as "to do" and "to solve". I have about 1300 caches on the list and every time we decide where to go caching I check the nearby caches again to see if anything else is "worthy". More than 95% of the caches we do are still worth doing, just as they were when we started in 2006. The difference is we didn't have to spend as much time filtering then as we do now.

It may depend on were you live but at least around here there's plenty go keep us busy for more than a year and by then I'm sure we'll have another year's worth on our list.

 

Share this post


Link to post

*sigh* not going to get into a semantics argument again. The point is clear: "Is there anything I've said that isn't the reality of the current state of geocaching?" Yes - that the description is just one perspective, and many, many, MANY people would beg to differ about the state of the hobby.  "I don't like it, but others do and you might too" is vastly different in tone than "You probably won't like it because I don't".  The latter discourages trying it out by stereotyping the entire hobby - detrimental. The former is honest about personal experience while encouraging - not detrimental.  Who knows what someone considers "good" or "fun". Try it and find out if you enjoy it.

Edited by thebruce0
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

*sigh* not going to get into a semantics argument again.

Nothing to do with semantics. Everything to do with unsubstantiated claims.

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

×