Jump to content

Incentives for cache owners?


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Barnyard Dawg said:

 

A trophy is not required, but a sincere form of recognition would be nice.

 

I used to volunteer for a very succesful self-help organisation. Other organisations I have been involved with were stressful, had in-fighting, volunteers felt used and unappreciated, and had high turnover of helpers. So I questioned why it was that people just wanted to hang around my organisation, why women whose children were heading off to university were still there offering support to mothers with newborn babies, and THIS is exactly what that something was. My organisation affirmed the value, regularly, of the volunteers who kept the organisation running. There wasn't any paid or profit-making upper echelons whose job it was, it was just volunteers supporting volunteers, but it was written into the very substance of the organisation. Where there is a clear heirarchy (eg in a company or a profit-making organisation), we usually look to the upper levels for this sort of support. It is pretty well accepted that people who feel supported and appreciated perform better.

Once again I repeat... Groundspeak need to decide for themselves how their business model works. How do they respond to the "players" (ie. cachers and cache owners? What message do they choose to send to them? How does their influence over the "players" and their own (high degree of) control over the game of geocaching affect their business decisions? It's their call. They can continue to allow people to think it's a US-based game (btw that person needs to check their facts) , make all their decisions based on a very short-sighted and US-centric view of the game, or they could change their perspective. Based on my past experience of their business choices, I personally don't hold out much hope for the whole game.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
7 hours ago, funkymunkyzone said:

I'm a little astonished by some of the comments on this thread, particularly the unsympathetic ones from people who have only ever cached in the US or within their cache dense country...

 

As someone who has actually found geocaches in quite a few pretty far flung and cache poor areas, I am EXTREMELY appreciative of the efforts of COs like @Barnyard Dawg because without them MY enjoyment of this game would be far less.

Thank you. Maybe too little, too late, but I appreciate your sentiments. Having taken part in one of these discussions for the first time ever, I can see why Barnyard Dawg expresses so much dissatisfaction with how geocaching is managed. it has been less than satisfacotry and faaarr from supportive. I am this . close to "doing a Dark Energy".

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On ‎10‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 7:27 PM, thebruce0 said:

Initially, I thought some kind of reward for finds on your caches would be intriguing, but even that could be games. There would be COs would not manage the logs on their caches. Problem with the cache? Don't worry, log it found anyway. A CO wanting that ownership reward would want to deter people recording they couldn't log it found. They'd encourage group caching; say it's perfectly fine if one person finds and the other 40 log it found, not a care in the world. If that wouldn't affect other people, I wouldn't have an issue. But illegitimate find logs do affect other geocachers, and that's why COs are prompted to watch and maintain their listing and log history and attempt to keep it accurate. I don't see how rewarding finds on a cache's CO encourages them to have a reasonably critical eye on Find logs.

We can't reject good new ideas based solely on those who may decide to scheme them.    We're always going to have people trying to fudge the system.   Why not look at ideas based on people playing the right way, which is the way most players do?        

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
22 hours ago, Barnyard Dawg said:

minimum requirement of 25-50 words would kill the dreaded "TFTC" take-all-leave nothing style of logs.

 

I used to loathe TFTC logs. Until word count became a statistic, and people started copying and pasting the same long logs in every cache. Much like the endless logs that result when a cacher kidnaps a TB for months at a time and visits them to every cache they find, all these do is fill up a page with text that is of zero use to anyone, save possibly to the originator.

 

TL;DR: no thank you to minimum log length requirements.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
36 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Why not look at ideas based on people playing the right way, which is the way most players do?        

 

I'm inclined to disbelieve that based on personal experience, in which people will game ANY system they can.

 

Even people who I expect to play straight rarely if ever do.

 

It's only a game = it doesn't matter what I do.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

 

I'm inclined to disbelieve that based on personal experience, in which people will game ANY system they can.

 

Even people who I expect to play straight rarely if ever do.

 

It's only a game = it doesn't matter what I do.

Keep in mind there's a difference between making mistakes or not understanding the right way to play and intentionally ignoring the guidelines.   In my experience there are very few of the latter. 

Link to comment
Just now, justintim1999 said:

Keep in mind there's a difference between making mistakes or not understanding the right way to play and intentionally ignoring the guidelines.   In my experience there are very few of the latter. 

 

Keep in mind I'm talking about people I know and who know perfectly well what they are doing.

 

In other words erm - nope.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, justintim1999 said:

We can't reject good new ideas based solely on those who may decide to scheme them.    We're always going to have people trying to fudge the system.   Why not look at ideas based on people playing the right way, which is the way most players do? 

If you've seen my posts, you'll know I do that. My comment you quoted was based on having already weighed both the benefits and drawbacks, and that was the opinion to which I resolved.

 

51 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

It's only a game = it doesn't matter what I do.

 

Also, "Everyone plays their own way"

Link to comment
1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

If you've seen my posts, you'll know I do that. My comment you quoted was based on having already weighed both the benefits and drawbacks, and that was the opinion to which I resolved.

 

 

Also, "Everyone plays their own way"

Everybody can play their own way......There's plenty of room to do that within the guidelines.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, justintim1999 said:

intentionally ignoring the guidelines.   In my experience there are very few of the latter. 

 

Participating in geocaching for 17 years has been an eye-opening experience in human nature. Especially once geocaching morphed into a game rather than a pastime.  Competition, numbers-behavior, group behavior, peer pressure, dominance, greed do strange things to good people. Based on your experience, I think the game is still in the pastime stage in your area. May it always be so. 

Edited by L0ne.R
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
24 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

 

Don't twist my words. That's rude.

 

The majority of GEOCACACHERS I know will bend the rules / cut corners to suit their particular goal if it suits them.

Not trying to be rude.  I just don't believe that the majority of cachers you know would grossly abuse the guidelines.     If that's true I feel sorry for you because that's not what I've seen.   Not even close.    I've seen many instances where someone has broken the guidelines because they're new and didn't understand them.  

 

People spend all kinds of time thinking of way to game the system and for what?   I'd rather not waste my time trying to stop them and use that time for more constructive things.  

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

Participating in geocaching for 17 years has been an eye-opening experience in human nature. Especially once geocaching morphed into a game rather than a pastime.  Competition, numbers-behavior, group behavior, peer pressure, dominance, greed do strange things to good people. Based on your experience, I think the game is still in the pastime stage in your area. May it always be so. 

Maybe your right.   Maybe my 100 mile radius of Geocaching experience is unique to the world.  I'd rather think that your past experiences has blinded you to everything that's good about Geocaching and your so focused on who's getting away with what you fail to see those that are having fun playing the right way. 

 

I truly hope I'm wrong on both counts. :rolleyes: 

Edited by justintim1999
Link to comment
17 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Not trying to be rude.  I just don't believe that the majority of cachers you know would grossly abuse the guidelines.     If that's true I feel sorry for you because that's not what I've seen.   Not even close.    I've seen many instances where someone has broken the guidelines because they're new and didn't understand them.  

 

People spend all kinds of time thinking of way to game the system and for what?   I'd rather not waste my time trying to stop them and use that time for more constructive things.  

 

Oh come on.

 

Exaggeration for effect is a cheap shot - did I SAY grossly abused?

 

Apparently those of us who see rule bending as a matter of routine, week in, week out must be blind?

 

If you ask me there's some truth in the expression "there are none so blind as those who will not see"!

 

It happens. Sitting there indignantly with your arms folded doesn't change the facts.

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Not trying to be rude.  I just don't believe that the majority of cachers you know would grossly abuse the guidelines.     If that's true I feel sorry for you because that's not what I've seen.   Not even close.    I've seen many instances where someone has broken the guidelines because they're new and didn't understand them.  

 

People spend all kinds of time thinking of way to game the system and for what?   I'd rather not waste my time trying to stop them and use that time for more constructive things.  

WTH? Just because you've not seen it means you don't believe it could be possible somewhere else? The majority of cachers I know speak Spanish, is that true in your area? If not then you don't believe me?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Just now, 31BMSG said:

WTH? Just because you've not seen it means you don't believe it could be possible somewhere else? The majority of cachers I know speak Spanish, is that true in your area? If not then you don't believe me?

I believe it happens all the time everywhere.  I don't think it represents the majority of people out there playing and I don't think we should be dismissing ideas because we're afraid the vast minority will abuse something.     

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

Apparently those of us who see rule bending as a matter of routine, week in, week out must be blind?

No not blind.   Obsessed.    For you and others it's become a cause.  To rid the Geocaching world of slackers and cheats.   As if you could.   I hate to break this to you but you can't.    You can't!   They're going to continue doing so regardless of how much you kick and scream. 

 

Now you're ready to crucify those that rule bend?   I can think of a dozen times I've had the power to bend the rules and did so for the right reasons.     

 

It's bad to dwell on things like this to the point you forget to actually have fun caching.     It's ok if a cheater has 5000 more finds than you do.   It's not the end of the world if an owner doesn't maintain a cache.     If you see something wrong fix it or report it and move on.

 

Have you had your blood pressure checked lately?  I'm beginning to worry about you.  ;)

Link to comment
Just now, justintim1999 said:

No not blind.   Obsessed.    For you and others it's become a cause.  To rid the Geocaching world of slackers and cheats.   As if you could.   I hate to break this to you but you can't.    You can't!   They're going to continue doing so regardless of how much you kick and scream. 

 

Now you're ready to crucify those that rule bend?   I can think of a dozen times I've had the power to bend the rules and did so for the right reasons.     

 

It's bad to dwell on things like this to the point you forget to actually have fun caching.     It's ok if a cheater has 5000 more finds than you do.   It's not the end of the world if an owner doesn't maintain a cache.     If you see something wrong fix it or report it and move on.

 

Have you had your blood pressure checked lately?  I'm beginning to worry about you.  ;)

If exaggeration is a cheap shot this is an outright low blow.  :P

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

No not blind.   Obsessed.    For you and others it's become a cause.  To rid the Geocaching world of slackers and cheats.   As if you could.   I hate to break this to you but you can't.    You can't!   They're going to continue doing so regardless of how much you kick and scream. 

 

Now you're ready to crucify those that rule bend?   I can think of a dozen times I've had the power to bend the rules and did so for the right reasons.     

 

It's bad to dwell on things like this to the point you forget to actually have fun caching.     It's ok if a cheater has 5000 more finds than you do.   It's not the end of the world if an owner doesn't maintain a cache.     If you see something wrong fix it or report it and move on.

 

Have you had your blood pressure checked lately?  I'm beginning to worry about you.  ;)

 

Good grief.

 

That's some powerful imagination right there.

 

Let us know when you come back to reality.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, justintim1999 said:
4 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

Also, "Everyone plays their own way"

Everybody can play their own way......There's plenty of room to do that within the guidelines.

Yes, but yours is not the oft-used quote I was referring to.  Additionally, I've already discussed how pushing to "within the guidelines" is as impersonal and unobservant of others' experiences as you can get allowably.

 

1 hour ago, justintim1999 said:

rid the Geocaching world of slackers and cheats.   As if you could.   I hate to break this to you but you can't.    You can't!   They're going to continue doing so regardless of how much you kick and scream. 

It's not all or nothing. It's always a balance to decide how much to deter "cheating" - primarily as it relates to working towards the most positive experience for the most people as possible. You make it sound like any attempt to thwart "slackers and cheats" is a complete waste of time. It absolutely isn't.  Trying to block them from doing anything? Well of course.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, justintim1999 said:

To rid the Geocaching world of slackers and cheats.   As if you could.   I hate to break this to you but you can't.    You can't!   They're going to continue doing so regardless of how much you kick and scream. 

 

The way I see it, it's similar to life. We need enforcement of a norm of conduct for this pastime. The current norm of conduct provided by GCHQ helps to create a more favorable pastime for all. People will always look for loopholes for personal advantage. Those loopholes once discovered are usually fixed.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

You make it sound like any attempt to thwart "slackers and cheats" is a complete waste of time.

I do?   Didn't I say "If you see something wrong fix it or report it and move on. "    The move on part is what I'm trying to emphasize here.  It's amazing how many "examples" of bad caches and bad cache owners have been posted here.   I'm guilty of it myself on these forums but only to make a point.   I get the impression that some actually go out of their way to keep track of such things on a daily basis and obsess on how to best fight these injustices.  

 

I'm for playing the game according to the guidelines and if I see something that I think is not right I'll make it right or post a log that will make the problem public.   What I won't do is obsess about it and spend countless hours documenting examples and complaining about unfair practices. 

 

Back on point.  I haven't seen anything negative in offering cache owners some sort of perk other than fear some among us will use it to cheat the system.    

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
32 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

I haven't seen anything negative in offering cache owners some sort of perk other than fear some among us will use it to cheat the system.    

 

It's called discussing the benefits and drawbacks. Concerns are raised about how certain idas can be gamed. You can't shrug them off when the whole point is to discuss how feasible certain ideas are. It's a fact that any process providing some form of independent perk will be gamed for said perks. Yes, we can shrug it off and move on, but that's not the point of the discussion. If the gaming of the system that some will do to get those "perks" has a negative impact on other people, those are legitimate concerns to raise. Then we can determine how significant those concerns are and whether they're enough to make the idea unfeasible. There's always a tradeoff. Is the tradeoff worth it? That's the question.

 

I think that a TB code has very little negative drawback overall, balanced by the somewhat rewarding perk that fairly universally accepted as having value within the hobby itself.

As opposed to for example Virtual Rewards, which would have been gamed if people knew about it, which in turn would have affected the global community; and since they weren't announced before being rewarded did have a negative effect in retrospect to people the hordes of people who felt left out, unvalued, unfairly disqualified, etc.

 

Two different types of rewards, each with benefits and drawbacks, some more significant than others.

Raise ideas. Discuss them. Don't make the claim that people are "obsessing" about how things can be gamed. That is part of the discussion.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

The way I see it, it's similar to life. We need enforcement of a norm of conduct for this pastime. The current norm of conduct provided by GCHQ helps to create a more favorable pastime for all. People will always look for loopholes for personal advantage. Those loopholes once discovered are usually fixed.

I thought norm of conduct was posting appropriate logs and allowing reviewers to use that information to make decisions?   Hasn't it always been that way?  I didn't realize that I was suppose to be hunting these criminals down and seeing they are duly punished?   That was a joke but for some not far from the truth. 

 

Are there loopholes the can be reasonably closed that GS doesn't know about?       Armchair loggers take advantage of the fact that most cache owners don't check physical logs with the paper logs.  Do we need to get rid of finds because of this loophole?    That's another silly joke but not as silly as thinking that GS could somehow make Geocaching bullet proof from cheaters and rule breakers.     Here's where I go off the rails.   The General Laws of Massachusetts has 5 parts.   Part 2 has 3 Titles.  Title 1 has 16 chapters and chapter 183 has 69 sections.   This is just the general laws. 

 

Point is you can't legislate morality.     

 

Geocaching has a set of guidelines.  What do you expect?  

 

I guess the question is,  dose providing an incentive to cache owners worth it knowing that some will Inevitably try to take advantage of them?    

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Raise ideas. Discuss them. Don't make the claim that people are "obsessing" about how things can be gamed. That is part of the discussion.

 

Sage advice.

 

I'll add to that - don't dismiss facts just because they don't support your position. That's equivalent to a child covering its eyes and claiming nobody can see it.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:
16 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Don't make the claim that people are "obsessing" about how things can be gamed. That is part of the discussion.

Your right and I'm discussing why I don't think it's worthy of consideration when it comes to this topic. 

 

Not quite.

 

What you've actually resorted to is ad hominem attacks because the experience of others contradicts yours.

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Point is you can't legislate morality. 

 

Talk about going off the rails. No one's advocating legislating morality. I know you're already off the rails by your own admission, but that has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion, whatsoever, which is examining the feasibility of whatever incentives could be offered for good cache ownership - their merits and their drawbacks.

Link to comment
39 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

I think that a TB code has very little negative drawback overall, balanced by the somewhat rewarding perk that fairly universally accepted as having value within the hobby itself.

 

And it has the added benefit of encouraging better trackable size containers. Owners may see the benefit of hiding more 100ml+ capacity quality containers when they are the owner of a trackable. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I really like the idea of recognition for COs. I don't know if *incentive* is the right word, but I agree with the OP that there would be no game, and therefore no Groundspeak, if it weren't for COs. What kicked this game off in the first place? A company who owns a website, or a cache to find?

 

I think it's true that if there were an "incentive", that might cause a rise in crummy caches. I realize that even less-than-ideal caches might be better than the dearth of caches in some areas. An appreciation of some sort would be neat tho. A coin or tag (souvenirs are just pointless, IMHO) for people with a cache over a certain amount favorite points, or with a certain cumulative favorite score. Maybe that would incentivise the placement of more quality caches. Maybe local/regional shindigs just for COs? 

 

Personally, my incentive for being a CO is placing caches that I would like to find. I abhor powertrails and micros-for-no-reason. I like caches that bring you to a special place, and I prefer regulars but I understand that isn't always possible.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
35 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Point is you can't legislate morality.     

'

I googled "can we legislate morality". First thing that comes up:

 

“You can't legislate morality” has become a common turn of phrase. The truth, however, is that every law and regulation that is proposed, passed, and enforced has inherent in it some idea of the good that it seeks to promote or preserve. Indeed, no governing authority can in any way be understood to be morally neutral.Nov 4, 2010
Link to comment
38 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Geocaching bullet proof from cheaters and rule breakers.

 

I agree and don't expect bullet proof enforcement. 

43 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

I guess the question is,  does providing an incentive to cache owners worth it knowing that some will Inevitably try to take advantage of them?    

 

So far, the TB idea is the upfront winning idea. It doesn't seem like an idea that has disadvantageous loopholes.  

Link to comment

 

22 hours ago, Barnyard Dawg said:

Again, not by choice, if everyone shared and idea instead of hijacking the thread and launching torpedoes, no ranting would have taken place.

To be honest, some of the responses have been rude and jaw-dropping, and the forum experience has been well below expectations so far.

We've all been trying to help. I'm sorry you don't see it that way. I've been a little surprised at how abrasive you've been in response. Your reaction to our responses has been almost exclusively complaining without seeming to understand the points being made.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
11 minutes ago, nericksx said:

for people with a cache over a certain amount favorite points, or with a certain cumulative favorite score

 

That part worries me and could be gamed.  I think it has to be more along the lines of cache owners who show good maintenance practices--no reviewer archivals, no NAs (without a good reason for the NA that doesn't involve neglect),  quick attention to NMs, no bogus OMs. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

That part worries me and could be gamed.  I think it has to be more along the lines of cache owners who show good maintenance practices--no reviewer archivals, no NAs (without a good reason for the NA that doesn't involve neglect),  quick attention to NMs, no bogus OMs. 

 

Ooh yeah, I like that idea too.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

What you've actually resorted to is ad hominem attacks because the experience of others contradicts yours.

 

... as opposed to immediately invalidating an idea because it clashes with own own USA-centric view of geocaching.

Because, after all, the game was invented in USA, the USA is its most important centre (please note "rest-of-the-world" spelling), and ... now, let me think, what else was claimed on this thread ... oh, yes, and because HQ have bigger fish to fry that half-bit nations half a globe away from themselves.

Someone on this thread mentioned that just because something is said on this thread, that doesn't mean HQ endorse that point of view or hold it themselves, but I must say, that in this case, it does sort of look like they do. Appearances can be deceptive. Let's hope it's just the angle I'm looking at it from.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
6 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

 

Talk about going off the rails. No one's advocating legislating morality. I know you're already off the rails by your own admission, but that has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion, whatsoever, which is examining the feasibility of whatever incentives could be offered for good cache ownership - their merits and their drawbacks.

 

As you pointed out though, it is good to look at all the angles when discussing a suggestion, and the liklihood of a new idea being abused is certainly worth the discussion, if only because the twisting of rules and working things to one's own benefit upsets those who play a straighter game, so to speak.  Much as I would love to see A LOT of changes in geocaching (and feel that geocaching.com should be the one doing it), I also don't see the point in introducing poorly-conceived ideas that might alienate large groups of people. The virtual rewards is the obvious case to back my argument.

I also do tend towards, in general, "you can't legislate happiness", inasmuch as if we were to refrain from making any changes based on whether people would try to manipulate things, no change would ever happen. You do your best when introducing something new, to close the loopholes, and try to leave options there (like reporting etc) for when someone does grossly exceed boundaries. And then step back and leave people to their own morality. We each have to live with our decisions and how we choose to live our lives, and if people are comfortable with their rule-bending, I'm generally happy to let them be, as long as their is no physical harm (or potential harm) to others. You do see some people getting way too passionate, and caring way too much about how others play the game. (Btw I have heard, "I play the game my way" a numer of times, and it has usually been a defensive stance in response to being challenged by someone on something they have done or habitually do, and would seem to be a way of saying, "butt out of how I do things and play your own game", an indication that either this person is resistant to community pressure OR they feel like someone is trying to interfere.)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
6 hours ago, dprovan said:

 

We've all been trying to help. I'm sorry you don't see it that way. I've been a little surprised at how abrasive you've been in response. Your reaction to our responses has been almost exclusively complaining without seeming to understand the points being made.

 

Speaking for myself here, not Barnyard Dawg. We live in the same country and therefore he might share the same perspective as me, though.
Some of the comments here I have found quite offensive. I'm not saying it was yours, but there have been a number of people who have got *my* hackles up. I have spent a lot of time and effort trying to promote the geocaching scene in Malaysia. I have put out 60 or more caches here, and I also own some Earth Caches in other countries in spots where there was an obvious lack of smilie opportunities. Malaysia is my home and while the caching here is not ideal, I try within my own means to improve it. A number of people have implied in this discussion that my ideas and opinions are not relevant because my geocaching experience in Malaysia (and, incidentally, Australia, Portugal, Spain, France, UK, Vietnam, Gibraltar, Singapore, Indonesia, etc etc) doesn't match with needs of the far more important USA geocachers. It's offensive and of course I'm going to get upset. There is also a tendency for people to get argumentitive and complaining (and often quite unreasonable and seemingly irrational) when they feel their viewpoint is not being listened to, so please keep that in mind.

Malaysia came very close yesterday to having half of the entire country's caches disabled. If I'd had the time to start the move, I would have, even though I know that the ones who made the unsympathetic comments, and the many others like them, probably don't even have a passport and wouldn't even notice anything, and if they did, they wouldn't care. From my experience in this thread, I have deduced that 30% of cachers think that USA (and perhaps Europe) is all that matters in geocaching, and people in low-density areas should shut up, stop complaining, do something about it, but certainly not expect any consideration in the big scheme of things. 5% have travelled to low-density areas and appreciate COs maintaining the few caches that are there. The remainder seem fairly neutral, in general. When I reply to this thread, that's my perceived audience.

Once again, I put on my rational hat and come back to my old question. As a business person, I tend to see geocaching from a business perspective. I don't expect GS to invest the same resources into slower caching areas like the one I live in. However, I'd like to know how (or if) the low-density caching areas fit into their business model? Good business relies on a) keeping existing customers happy, b) looking for new customers. Do they ascribe to the values and attitudes that a couple of people have put forward in this discussion, or do they seek to support the game outside of the USA, either because they feel an obligation (having. probably inadvertently, through hard work and good business practice, hijacked the game by winning the internet market) or because they deem it good business practice?

And this theoretical question is also not relevant to this thread. I suppose the relevant question is, is there any validity at all in the opinion of Barnyard Dawg and StopTheWorld, given that they live in Malaysia and have a vastly different experience of geocaching to the milleu in USA?

Link to comment
6 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

  

So far, the TB idea is the upfront winning idea. It doesn't seem like an idea that has disadvantageous loopholes.  

 

As the one that put that forward, I also like the idea, but ... I personally would prefer something that puts cache ownership on the same pedestal as cache finding. Maybe a second number after your caching name, or something like that. I haven't thought a lot (at all) about the pros and cons though. I'm often horrified when someone logs my caches with 25,000, 50,000 or even 100,000 finds, and I look at their profile to discover they have placed one or no caches. What's with that? Shouldn't it be as much a cause for pride if I own 10 caches, as if I've found 50,000? I suppose the old argument of encouraging poor quality caches (which has merit) might be in play here. We certainly don't want to encourage players like the ones in Japan and South Korea that "own" and allegedly maintain 2000 caches!
What about adding the karma score somewhere very prominent on a profile? Or introduce a new CO karma, based on caches owned, logs received,  time for maintenance (perhaps), FP recieved etc? Just another idea to bandy around ...

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Ok, all this rhetoric blaming the "USA" for stuff has put me, a Canadian, in a state of hands-off in this thread. Seems like there's some other toxicity in the environment here, so I'm outtie...

You obviously didn't read the whole thread.  Nobody is blaming the USA, though you are right, it has been rather toxic. My first and dare I say last involvement in a GC thread, it's not very supportive.

I was just pointing out that some of the comments not only implied, were outright adamant, that the USA is the the most important region for geocaching. I didn't make the initial comment but I was offended by it, and it was like rubbing salt into a wound. Those of us in outlying areas already feel ignored by HQ, but it would nice to think that our opinions and experiences weren't going to be summarily dismissed in the same way on forums. I might have taken it the wrong way, and maybe Team Microdot, dprovan and TeamRabbitRun just meant that I *shouldn't expect HQ to care* for what happens in minor caching spots, but I felt that they were suggesting that things that apply to other regions are irrelevant and I should quit having an opinion.


Shame to see you go, I have appreciated your rational input very much.

Edited by StopTheWorld
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...