Jump to content

Hidden Creatures--questionable finds


Recommended Posts

With today being the last day to get The Turtle, there's a local cacher who I suspect is, well, let's be bold and say "may be cheating".  In the last 3 days, this person has found all the needed 50 caches.  The last 29 were signed "Spontaneous geocaching today... didn't sign log but promise will do later...".  On one, it was signed that they forgot a pencil.  Really?  3 days in a row, and the last day you forget to bring along a pencil?

I will be checking mine shortly, as well as some of those where it was posted TFTC, to see if those were signed.  

Hope I'm wrong......

 

Link to comment

Still could be worth auditing the logs anyway; to ensure log accuracy and double checking all those caches are actually findable (in case one of the false finds incorrectly implies the cache is good). *shrug* Or not. Up to the CO. Still... that kind of finder strategy just begs for a hammerdown.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
4 hours ago, GrateBear said:

With today being the last day to get The Turtle, there's a local cacher who I suspect is, well, let's be bold and say "may be cheating".  In the last 3 days, this person has found all the needed 50 caches.  The last 29 were signed "Spontaneous geocaching today... didn't sign log but promise will do later...".  On one, it was signed that they forgot a pencil.  Really?  3 days in a row, and the last day you forget to bring along a pencil?

I will be checking mine shortly, as well as some of those where it was posted TFTC, to see if those were signed.  

Hope I'm wrong......

 

 That's really funny. It's not, but it is.

Link to comment

I asked about the timeline, and the response was "maybe later tonight".  Have to say, if someone wants to cheat, so be it.  Not gonna impact my life or enjoyment of this hobby.  I just appreciate honesty.  And, I'm sure all of us has been somewhat less than honest at some point in our lives;)

Link to comment

Well, today I checked my two hides that the cacher "found but forgot a pen and will sign later".  3 weeks later, and not signed.  What I figure is that this person wanted to get "The Turtle", so just claimed enough finds on the last day to get to 100.  I've deleted the "found it" posts.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
5 hours ago, MartyBartfast said:

Fair enough, but deleting those "found it" logs now won't remove their Turtle souvenir....

 

 

The cheater got what he wanted,  the souvenir. Doubt the deletion of his find matters to him since he knows there are tons more caches out there that he can falsely log. 

I don't do souvenirs myself but if I did, and had any say so, I'd have the programming set up so that the souvenir automatically went away if any of the needed cache find logs got deleted.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Mudfrog said:

 

The cheater got what he wanted,  the souvenir. Doubt the deletion of his find matters to him since he knows there are tons more caches out there that he can falsely log. 

I don't do souvenirs myself but if I did, and had any say so, I'd have the programming set up so that the souvenir automatically went away if any of the needed cache find logs got deleted.

 

Hypothetically, then you could have the opposite problem. A disgruntled CO who does not like souvenirs so he/she goes and deletes logs just to mess with someone. Personally I spent hours going for my dumb souvenir.

 

Honestly, Goundspeak has the right idea here. They know folks can and will cheat but they really don't care as the headaches of enforcement would be so huge. The reality is someones cheating does not take away from my enjoyment.

 

The only way I can think of helping to curb cheating is if everyone takes a picture of the log when they log a cache and submit it. Do I do this myself, no. Give the co a small window to maintain the logs so if aa throw down does occur only the first group is penalized.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

I'd have the programming set up so that the souvenir automatically went away if any of the needed cache find logs got deleted

I suspect the programming overhead for that would be huge, every time a log gets deleted it would have to search every souvenir the cacher holds  to see if that log was a qualifying log for each souvenir. Once it established that the log in question was a qualifier for a particular souvenir, e.g. the Turtle,  it would then have to check all the cacher's other logs to see if removing that one took them below the 100 threshold or not; similarly for a country souvenir, having deleted a log for a find in France,  for example,  it would have to check all the cacher's other logs to see if they had any other finds in France before removing the souvenir.

 

Given that souvenirs are even more pointless than real souvenir keyrings/baseball caps/tea towels/etc. then I can understand why they don't want to pursue this line.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

I don't do souvenirs myself but if I did, and had any say so, I'd have the programming set up so that the souvenir automatically went away if any of the needed cache find logs got deleted.

 

I'd like to see that as well, and don't know why it'd be such a problem -  your find count's lowered by one, so something's keeping track...

We have one that's there by accident, and left it for when a delete is available (to test it out).   :)

We figure a delete function will remove the inconvenience for us and HQ in emailing to delete an unwanted souvenir.  "Hiding" not the same.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, MartyBartfast said:

Given that souvenirs are even more pointless than real souvenir keyrings/baseball caps/tea towels/etc. then I can understand why they don't want to pursue this line.

 

To you.   We know a few others who are similar to the other 2/3rds and souvenirs.

She doesn't even cache anymore, but pays attention to trackables, and I'm expected to head out this Saturday for that souvi.   :)

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

To you.   We know a few others who are similar to the other 2/3rds and souvenirs.

She doesn't even cache anymore, but pays attention to trackables, and I'm expected to head out this Saturday for that souvi.   :)

Agreed.

 

Souvenirs aren't anyway near my top 100 reasons to geocache, but they certainly DO affect my geocaching behavior. For a souvenir, I may turn left instead of right. I may drive an extra mile (or 100). I may get up an hour earlier (or two). I may choose to vacation near Seattle or Portland this summer rather than San Diego or Denver.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, MNTA said:

Honestly, Goundspeak has the right idea here. They know folks can and will cheat but they really don't care as the headaches of enforcement would be so huge. The reality is someones cheating does not take away from my enjoyment.

Just to be clear, the current behaviour is a technical limitation that resulted from bolting the souvenir system onto the ancient log system. If the entire system could be rebuilt from scratch, I have no doubt that a souvenir would be deleted if the user no longer qualified for it, since it's only logical. It's just that getting to that point is very difficult given the old code that's in place, so we're stuck with the way it is. Don't think of it as a conscious choice, but rather as a lack of available developer time and resources.

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

You are missing my point. Yes you can solve this one aspect of the game. But why? It will just create headaches elsewhere. 

 

Rebuilding a system from scratch is easier said than done. The whole game/sport/hobby is built around turn of the century technology. I for one am glad they keep improving things and making it easier to use. Maybe every new cache needs a QR code printed on the log to verify it truly was found or require a picture of the log for every submission. After all most folks have smartphone after all. 

 

My point is if you put a system in place to catch loggers you also need a system to protect the loggers from the abusive CO that may not like you for some reason. Hey it's Joe (no offense meant to anyone name Joe) again let me delete his log. So if you start policing one aspect of the game you increase the need elsewhere. If you accept that some cheating does take place ask yourself who does it hurt?

 

GS is improving a lot of the aspects of the game I suspect over time you'll see better maintenance, fewer throw downs, and higher overall experience.  Let's stay positive and constructive to bring in the next generation of cachers. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
11 hours ago, MNTA said:

 

Hypothetically, then you could have the opposite problem. A disgruntled CO who does not like souvenirs so he/she goes and deletes logs just to mess with someone. Personally I spent hours going for my dumb souvenir.

 

Honestly, Goundspeak has the right idea here. They know folks can and will cheat but they really don't care as the headaches of enforcement would be so huge. The reality is someones cheating does not take away from my enjoyment.

 

The only way I can think of helping to curb cheating is if everyone takes a picture of the log when they log a cache and submit it. Do I do this myself, no. Give the co a small window to maintain the logs so if aa throw down does occur only the first group is penalized.

 

I actually thought of that as I was typing my previous reply. You're certainly right that a CO might delete a log just because he can. Honestly though, how often would it actually happen? I've been caching since 02 and in all that time, had one log deleted. That log, along with a few others that had legitimately found the same cache, was reinstated by Groundspeak. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
21 hours ago, MNTA said:

You are missing my point. Yes you can solve this one aspect of the game. But why? It will just create headaches elsewhere. 

...

My point is if you put a system in place to catch loggers you also need a system to protect the loggers from the abusive CO that may not like you for some reason. Hey it's Joe (no offense meant to anyone name Joe) again let me delete his log. So if you start policing one aspect of the game you increase the need elsewhere. If you accept that some cheating does take place ask yourself who does it hurt?

How much do you think this would really happen, though? If a CO has a beef with a particular cacher, it seems unlikely to me that the CO would delete logs primarily based on how it will affect the finder's souvenirs. They'd be deleting the logs simply to spite the finder.

 

Deletion of logs is something that has had to be dealt with pretty much since this site was created, and there are procedures in place to deal with it. Having more-accurate souvenirs is unlikely to create a noticeable increase in the number of log deletions.

 

That being said, I do find it unlikely that anything will be done to fix the problem we have now with the souvenirs due to a lack of resources.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

That being said, I do find it unlikely that anything will be done to fix the problem we have now with the souvenirs due to a lack of resources.

Yeah, given how long it's taking just to create the remaining country Souvenirs...

Link to comment
On 8/15/2018 at 9:20 AM, Mudfrog said:

 

The cheater got what he wanted,  the souvenir.

All that cheating is a lot of work for a computer-generated image, lol.  I wonder what goes on in the cheater's mind.  I mean, I worked rather diligently to get my turtle, but the little souvenir doesn't really matter.  It is the fact that I accomplished the challenge set forth.  My mind is satisfied by completing the challenge.  I guess the cheater's mind might say something like, "I hope all my friends notice how I have this souvenir so they think I am really cool!"

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Just want to note that this is the first time I have ever deleted a log.  I don't go over replaced logs and verify they've been signed, even when the log says they forgot a pen.  The reason for this time was because the cacher went out 3 days in a row to get all 100 caches, and on the 3rd day, somehow forgot a pen.  And that was for all of those that were found that day (I think 25).  The intention was not to delete the souvenir, which I knew would not happen. Like the old saying "don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining".

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
23 minutes ago, GrateBear said:

Just want to note that this is the first time I have ever deleted a log.  I don't go over replaced logs and verify they've been signed, even when the log says they forgot a pen.  The reason for this time was because the cacher went out 3 days in a row to get all 100 caches, and on the 3rd day, somehow forgot a pen.  And that was for all of those that were found that day (I think 25).  The intention was not to delete the souvenir, which I knew would not happen. Like the old saying "don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining".

 

I've lost my pen on walks before in between cache finds. Though I will always take a picture of the log as my only proof. Honestly I think maybe every log should have an accompanying picture. 

 

Today I deleted my first log. Just started hiding caches and my newest hide a 5/1 challenge cache had a bogus log by an experienced cacher. Would have been the second finder of the cache. I now have mixed feeling on the subject, feel bad but did the right thing. 

 

Link to comment
On 8/20/2018 at 4:27 PM, GrateBear said:

Just want to note that this is the first time I have ever deleted a log.  I don't go over replaced logs and verify they've been signed, even when the log says they forgot a pen.  The reason for this time was because the cacher went out 3 days in a row to get all 100 caches, and on the 3rd day, somehow forgot a pen.  And that was for all of those that were found that day (I think 25).  The intention was not to delete the souvenir, which I knew would not happen. Like the old saying "don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining".

I think it's great that you deleted the log. Maybe the cacher will give a second-thought to logging caches without signing now that they know at least someone checks the logs on their caches.

 

On 8/20/2018 at 4:58 PM, MNTA said:

I've lost my pen on walks before in between cache finds. Though I will always take a picture of the log as my only proof. Honestly I think maybe every log should have an accompanying picture.

No thank you. There have been plenty of times when I found a cache, and signed the physical logsheet, yet did not have the capability of taking a picture.  And consider that there are some cachers that do not use smartphones and taking photos with a camera or their dumbphone may be quite cumbersome.

  • For a park-and-grab, I might leave my phone in my car and don't want to have to go back to get the phone to take a picture.
  • For tree-climb caches, it can be difficult enough to sign the log without dropping the pen/logsheet/container, so I wouldn't want to add the risk of pulling out and dropping my phone to the equation.
  • For paddle caches, I usually keep my phone inside a dry bag and wouldn't want to have to take it out for a photo and/or use a special case/cover just to take a picture of a logsheet.
  • For any cache, there have been times that my phone battery was too low (under 5%) for the camera to work.

 

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, noncentric said:

I think it's great that you deleted the log. Maybe the cacher will give a second-thought to logging caches without signing now that they know at least someone checks the logs on their caches.

 

No thank you. There have been plenty of times when I found a cache, and signed the physical logsheet, yet did not have the capability of taking a picture.  And consider that there are some cachers that do not use smartphones and taking photos with a camera or their dumbphone may be quite cumbersome.

  • For a park-and-grab, I might leave my phone in my car and don't want to have to go back to get the phone to take a picture.
  • For tree-climb caches, it can be difficult enough to sign the log without dropping the pen/logsheet/container, so I wouldn't want to add the risk of pulling out and dropping my phone to the equation.
  • For paddle caches, I usually keep my phone inside a dry bag and wouldn't want to have to take it out for a photo and/or use a special case/cover just to take a picture of a logsheet.
  • For any cache, there have been times that my phone battery was too low (under 5%) for the camera to work.

 

noncentric beat me to it. I do NOT think every log should have a photo.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
20 hours ago, noncentric said:

I think it's great that you deleted the log. Maybe the cacher will give a second-thought to logging caches without signing now that they know at least someone checks the logs on their caches.

 

No thank you. There have been plenty of times when I found a cache, and signed the physical logsheet, yet did not have the capability of taking a picture.  And consider that there are some cachers that do not use smartphones and taking photos with a camera or their dumbphone may be quite cumbersome.

  • For a park-and-grab, I might leave my phone in my car and don't want to have to go back to get the phone to take a picture.
  • For tree-climb caches, it can be difficult enough to sign the log without dropping the pen/logsheet/container, so I wouldn't want to add the risk of pulling out and dropping my phone to the equation.
  • For paddle caches, I usually keep my phone inside a dry bag and wouldn't want to have to take it out for a photo and/or use a special case/cover just to take a picture of a logsheet.
  • For any cache, there have been times that my phone battery was too low (under 5%) for the camera to work.

 

 

I wonder how much memory on a smart phone would be used if someone had to take a photo for every cache on a large power trail?   I also wonder how fast GS would raise their premium membership rates to pay for all the storage it would take to store a photo for every found it log.

Link to comment
37 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

I wonder how much memory on a smart phone would be used if someone had to take a photo for every cache on a large power trail?   I also wonder how fast GS would raise their premium membership rates to pay for all the storage it would take to store a photo for every found it log.

Challenge accepted!

 

Oh, wait, that would mean that I would need to do one of those large numbers trails. Um, never mind...

  • Funny 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...