Jump to content

Incentives for cache owners?


Recommended Posts

On 10/26/2018 at 12:20 AM, dprovan said:

...you're also going to get reactions from people who cache in areas where your solutions to your problems will cause much bigger problems. You're very intent on getting us to see your problem, but you seem to fob off our problems as nothing but arrogance.

So I think I read you wrong when I first got this message, however I think you got me wrong too. I'm sorry if you thought I was fobbing off your problems at all. I'm open to discussion of all the options and how they affect the global game of geocaching and I wonder what I said that suggested otherwise? If I did, I would be guilty of exactly what I have just accused you of, that is, insisting that a problem only be looked at from my own perspective.

I do get pretty defensive when people suggest that our market matters not one zot (I felt the same when I was in regional Australia), because it is a little close to the bone. I apologise for that too, to all that I might have offended. I'd prefer if the discussion here actually opened up opportunities for people in other areas to be heard, rather than shutting down those voices again. It's not helpful to suggest we stop trying to improve things in places other than USA, and it's not fair to condemn us for campaigning. Put me in my place, if I ever impinge upon your rights, and heaven forbid if I ever try to force something that would be negative for the majority, but I'd appreciate it if you listened. It is my love of geocaching that drives me to try and grow the game, and I wouldn't do anything to harm geocaching in America or anywhere else.

So perhaps I got it wrong, and it was that you were actually saying that we should go out and fix it for ourselves, because HQ really don't care? I agree (a couple of us do an awful lot and the recent changes in geocaching in Malaysia would put most to shame), but the topic of this thread was whether there are things that could be done centrally that might work globally to encourage cache ownership worldwide. Not in Malaysia. Not in USA. Though obviously I am as interested in your perception of possible problems as you would be in mine. Maybe we could discuss what the potential problems are, rather than trying to shut people down ?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour 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...

 

Indeed, we're not blaming anyone!  All we're saying is that we feel left out and the world is larger then the USA.  If the game can be touted as global, that's only because of people like us!  A narrow minded view does not help!

 

Far more disappointing is that some here can't stick to the topic of the thread.  Instead any idea is knocked down with the same excuse, and without so much as mentioning an alternative or idea of their own.  The thread would not have gone "us against them" if some here would not have been allowed to hijacked and flood it with nonsense (forum guidelines 2, 6 anyone?).  Forum members distributing poor advice such as lowering DT ratings are a detriment to the game and should imho not be tolerated here.  It appears however that there's an established idiocracy that enjoys full support from above (that's not attacking an individual, just a general observation)!  There is an attitude problem, and I agree, it does create a toxic environment, and I fail to see how it benefits the game, that's not helping, that's deliberately causing problems!  Where are the moderators when you need them?  Making edits, dumbing things down, and deleting posts, all done to accommodate the guidelines, and yet... some "contributors" remain unchecked ...if anything positive I could say about that, is that protecting the dim of wit certainly is a noble cause (not a personal attack, just a general observation)!

 

In all, the amount of well aimed backlash witnessed here was rather unexpected and somewhat disheartening.

 

Horribly sad that a simply thread as this one could not stay on topic because of supported trolling.  Are you then surprised HQ does not care about what goes on here?  The forum has been reduced to a platform to keep up appearances.  Very sad for geocaching, and even more so for those who do try to provide constructive feedback (thank you), I'm sorry people have to deal with this nonsense, I truly am!

 

I do understand that some do not like to read that the game is anything but perfect, but instead of hiding the truth and clamping down on any form of criticism, accept the facts for what they are and try to work toward a solution.  Yes, of course not all suggestions are viable, but does that mean we should stop sharing?  Don't tackle any idea with the same poor excuse, try to be a but more constructive, improve on it, or share your own!

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Barnyard Dawg said:

In a last attempt to get back on-topic, what could HQ do to make life a bit easier for cache owners?

From what's happened here in the states, I'd say what HQ could do to make life a bit easier for cache owners is to back off and leave them alone. GS has a tendency to try to solve problems by making things more complicated for cache owners. Cache owners aren't much more lucrative than low density countries.

Edited by dprovan
clarify that "here" means "the U.S.", not here in this thread or here in the forums
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
53 minutes ago, Barnyard Dawg said:

I do understand that some do not like to read that the game is anything but perfect, but instead of hiding the truth and clamping down on any form of criticism, accept the facts for what they are and try to work toward a solution.  Yes, of course not all suggestions are viable, but does that mean we should stop sharing?  Don't tackle any idea with the same poor excuse, try to be a but more constructive, improve on it, or share your own!

Ha-ha-ha!! The people that are questioning your solutions are the masters of criticizing geocaching. If you think your problem here is that you're running into an entrenched establishment, you're completely mistaken.

 

There are no magic solutions to your problem. The way to improve your culture is to go out and improve it. Nothing someone does in Seattle, Washington, is going to cause geocacher owners to sprout up on the other side of the globe. Geocache owners can only grow out of a supportive community of geocache seekers.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
1 hour ago, dprovan said:

Ha-ha-ha!! The people that are questioning your solutions are the masters of criticizing geocaching. If you think your problem here is that you're running into an entrenched establishment, you're completely mistaken.

 

There are no magic solutions to your problem. The way to improve your culture is to go out and improve it. Nothing someone does in Seattle, Washington, is going to cause geocacher owners to sprout up on the other side of the globe. Geocache owners can only grow out of a supportive community of geocache seekers.

 

The concise voice of reason ?

Link to comment
22 hours ago, dprovan said:

Ha-ha-ha!! The people that are questioning your solutions are the masters of criticizing geocaching. If you think your problem here is that you're running into an entrenched establishment, you're completely mistaken.

So... are you saying that these people are generally negative or cynical people and are not likely to be able to make suggestions because they don't believe there is anything that would improve the game. Or something else? If they criticise the game, it's not that they believe it's fine how it is and should be left alone (which is what I'd thought some people might think).

 

22 hours ago, dprovan said:

 

There are no magic solutions to your problem. The way to improve your culture is to go out and improve it. Nothing someone does in Seattle, Washington, is going to cause geocacher owners to sprout up on the other side of the globe. Geocache owners can only grow out of a supportive community of geocache seekers.

I've lived in another place where geocaching took off, despite not having a community of any sort. Until I moved to Malaysia, I think I'd been to 2 events in 5 years in my home town. Though I would absolutely agree that the network is important for it to thrive, and it's something we have here that we didn't have 2 years ago, when I took up geocaching again after a long break. It does make a world of difference. So you believe there is nothing else that could be done centrally that might make life more rewarding for cache owners, nothing that could be incorporated inherent in the game that might inspire people to place a cache, or one more cache?


I have certainly noticed that there is some drive inside of some people, that makes them want to hide caches, and some people just don't have it. Some can't wait to place their first hide, and start planning it almost as soon as they made their first find. Others have found 93,000 caches and not placed a single one, nor hosted a single event. There's not much you can do about the natural desire (or lack of) to place a cache, or to take a leadership role in the community.

 

But ... the thread wasn't really about placing caches, I think the question was really how make cache ownership more rewarding? Extrinsically or intrinsically. So, those of you who don't think there's anything that could be done by anyone but the CO themselves and their immediate community, may now stop reading.

 

A lot of members have mentioned that they think that logs should be the best reward for a CO, however they often fall short of being rewarding. Idea here: maybe more publicity of the issue, eg. instead of so many articles about an amazing cache that's placed somewhere I'm never likely to get to, mix in a couple about the joy of reading a great log, and put some emphasis on responsible logging. Make good logging a matter of pride. I would support a minimum number of characters, too. Of course it won't stop the "ipsem lorem ..." , cut-and-paste multiple logs, "esfkj ndadasaks " or even the oh-so-funny "TFTC TFTC TFTC TFTC TFTC" BUT I believe it would at least send the message that the proper and polite thing to do is to leave a decent message. The prompt when someone fails to leave insufficient characters could say as much, eg "Log must be at least 25 characters. You log lets the cache owner know how their cache is doing and encourages them to keep it maintained for others". I also love the idea that GS is trialling for upvoting logs. A new automatic souvenir system could be put in place for log karma, based on that system. A souvenir for 10 upvoted logs, another for 100 etc. Yes, I know this could be manipulated, as can most stuff, maybe too easy to manipulate, or too easy a souvenir for those with a lot of caching friends. Maybe limited votes, as with FP? It might not work in caches that aren't found as often, or maybe work better? I'm looking forward to seeing the outcome.

 

Here's another idea or two I'll get shot down for, I'm sure, though it's a bit hard to discuss ideas if every idea is summarily dismissed, so here I go into the fire... (oh, and btw I am not using only my experience in Malaysia, I have thought a little about others I know in very different places). What about a souvenir challenge that is only open to cache owners? It wouldn't necessarily challenge people to change their *immediate* behaviours, as you would never, for instance, offer a souvenir for placing a cache this week. But they might change in anticipation for the following year, if they are inspired by souvenirs. Existing COs might well be encouraged to aim higher, especially those (like I was back in Australia) with limited support network. I'd never thought to do better, was never challenged to try harder with cache ownership, and the only feedback I even gained was from logs (which sometimes is a bit too late, after the cache has been placed and listed). And offering an annual challenge sends a message, that HQ want to encourage good cache ownership, not just finding caches. Maybe I'm being presumptious here? It sounds like in some areas, they might be doing quite the opposite, and encouraing cache ownership is not on their agenda at all?  ... Which could be the mistake I have been making all along, because I have *never* cached in an area completely overwhelmed with caches, not in Australia, or Singapore, even the places in Europe we caches (in 2010), we had to hunt down and go out of our way for caches.


My other idea was perhaps to broaden the scope of the souvenir challenges that HQ currently offer, to include cache ownership. It's come up numerous times already, and I like the *general concept* though I understand it's complicated. If they are trying to encourage people just to get out there and look for more caches, and only that, then it wouldn't make sense. But if they are trying to encourage responsible cache ownership, there are possible ways they could incorporate it into challenges. Too many ideas and details going around in my head to put them all down (like, how helpful it would be to some people I know in Australia who have found most of the caches in a wide radius and also dismissed the challenge as they didn't have time for  long road trip) and I have already mentioned some, which were cut down because it was seen to serve only people like myself who spend 90% of their time on cache ownership and placement and get little finding done. But consider this:
When a challenge arrives and I see the requirements, I usually dismiss it straight away, unless I am likely to be travelling in that period (I usually don't get enough notice to actually plan my travel to fit in). For the last few years, my nearest unfound cache for 300+ days a year is 93km away, and after that, it's nearly 200km to the next one. Sometimes I will look at the fine print and see if I can work a way around it. For instance, I'm about to submit a few events that my husband and I might possibly be the only attendees, though I do hope to either lure some caching friends down from Penang or up from KL, or with luck, a visitor from Europe. We'll still get 15 points for the challenge, even if we are the only attendees. Sometimes I figure there's no way I will get the souvenir but I can help friends gain it, if I can lure them up here, and at least I get some nice logs. IF I saw some CO requirement that I couldn't meet this time around, I would be asking, "are they going to include that next time?" If there was some guarantee that they would, it would give me something different and interesting to aim for. Though a guaranteed souvenir once a year (like the EC souvenir, I love that and plan ahead for it!) would be better, I think. But I think it would not only be Barnyard Dawg and myself who would appreciate some complicated algorithm like, "IF the cacher has found >95% of the caches in their 50km radium, OR IF there are less than 10 unfound caches in their 50km radius, THEN all logs in the challenge period on any cache owned by that cacher earns one point towards the challenge AND THEN all FP given in the challenge period to any cache owned by that cacher earns 5 points". It's like the "passive income" way of earning points but it might be worth discussion, some consideration at least.

Good on you Barnyard Dawg for trying to get the thread back OT. I hope I have stayed on topic! I've ranted a bit, I guess because for me cache ownership is a big deal. I realise for some it isn't a big deal at all, in fact, for some, it isn't any deal at all.

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
12 hours ago, StopTheWorld said:

So... are you saying that these people are generally negative or cynical people and are not likely to be able to make suggestions because they don't believe there is anything that would improve the game. Or something else? If they criticise the game, it's not that they believe it's fine how it is and should be left alone (which is what I'd thought some people might think).

Speaking of cynical...

 

No, I'm saying these are people that are always arguing over various ways to improve the game, so they're open to all manner of changes. If they object as a group to any given suggestion, it's because something like it has already been considered at length -- or tried -- so the downside is well understood and you should listen to what it is.

12 hours ago, StopTheWorld said:

I've lived in another place where geocaching took off, despite not having a community of any sort.

Taking off means having a community. I think you're mistaking my use of the word "community" for something specific, like events. Every place is different. Every community develops in its own way. That's why a central solution isn't likely to work for your area, and why the community can only grow from people in the community. Unfortunately, I'm not sure every area can develop a healthy community, but I do think that the only way you can have a healthy community is by first recognizing the it is a community and not mistake it for nothing more than a tiny, indistinguishable part of "geocaching".

12 hours ago, StopTheWorld said:

So you believe there is nothing else that could be done centrally that might make life more rewarding for cache owners, nothing that could be incorporated inherent in the game that might inspire people to place a cache, or one more cache?

I'm not sure if anything more could be done to make life more rewarding for cache owners, but I've observed two things. First, cache owners need to be motivated by their caches first, and I've found they usually are. If they aren't, the best any rewards GS hands out will produce is more low quality caches. Second, the more GS produces artificial rewards for ownership, the more minimized the owners that don't need artificial rewards feel. If makes them feel like large quantities of inferior caches are considered more important than the heartfelt caches self-motivated COs put out.

 

Wait. "Inspire"? Yes, that's a great idea. Work to inspire cache owners, not to reward them. GS tries to do a lot of that, and god bless them for it. But it won't help if there aren't any COs in your area to inspire.

12 hours ago, StopTheWorld said:

A lot of members have mentioned that they think that logs should be the best reward for a CO, however they often fall short of being rewarding. Idea here: maybe more publicity of the issue, eg. instead of so many articles about an amazing cache that's placed somewhere I'm never likely to get to, mix in a couple about the joy of reading a great log, and put some emphasis on responsible logging. Make good logging a matter of pride. I would support a minimum number of characters, too. Of course it won't stop the "ipsem lorem ..." , cut-and-paste multiple logs, "esfkj ndadasaks " or even the oh-so-funny "TFTC TFTC TFTC TFTC TFTC" BUT I believe it would at least send the message that the proper and polite thing to do is to leave a decent message. The prompt when someone fails to leave insufficient characters could say as much, eg "Log must be at least 25 characters. You log lets the cache owner know how their cache is doing and encourages them to keep it maintained for others". I also love the idea that GS is trialling for upvoting logs. A new automatic souvenir system could be put in place for log karma, based on that system. A souvenir for 10 upvoted logs, another for 100 etc. Yes, I know this could be manipulated, as can most stuff, maybe too easy to manipulate, or too easy a souvenir for those with a lot of caching friends. Maybe limited votes, as with FP? It might not work in caches that aren't found as often, or maybe work better? I'm looking forward to seeing the outcome.

People regularly talk about this in the forums. I don't read much of what GS puts out, but I seem to recall blogs about the joys of good logs. As you observe, upvoting is already being studied. I don't think it will help, but I'm not opposed to it. The reason I don't think it will help is much the same as why I don't think CO rewards work: while imagining you're rewarding logs of the type you describe, in the end you only reward logs that win the reward, and that often is something quite different. You call it manipulation, but if they do something other than what you wanted them to do, blame the reward. Anyway, I think upvoting will be harmless, so I'll be all for it if only because it will make you happy, so don't accuse me of being negative or obstructive. But I predict it will be soon forgotten and ignored.

 

12 hours ago, StopTheWorld said:

Here's another idea or two I'll get shot down for, I'm sure, though it's a bit hard to discuss ideas if every idea is summarily dismissed, so here I go into the fire... (oh, and btw I am not using only my experience in Malaysia, I have thought a little about others I know in very different places). What about a souvenir challenge that is only open to cache owners? It wouldn't necessarily challenge people to change their *immediate* behaviours, as you would never, for instance, offer a souvenir for placing a cache this week. But they might change in anticipation for the following year, if they are inspired by souvenirs. Existing COs might well be encouraged to aim higher, especially those (like I was back in Australia) with limited support network. I'd never thought to do better, was never challenged to try harder with cache ownership, and the only feedback I even gained was from logs (which sometimes is a bit too late, after the cache has been placed and listed). And offering an annual challenge sends a message, that HQ want to encourage good cache ownership, not just finding caches. Maybe I'm being presumptious here? It sounds like in some areas, they might be doing quite the opposite, and encouraing cache ownership is not on their agenda at all?  ... Which could be the mistake I have been making all along, because I have *never* cached in an area completely overwhelmed with caches, not in Australia, or Singapore, even the places in Europe we caches (in 2010), we had to hunt down and go out of our way for caches.

I'm not sure exactly what you're proposing here. You talk about aiming higher, but I don't understand how a owner-only souvenir would do that. But, no matter, I'm all for it, too. In this case, I suspect that it will just be completely ignored. I doubt many people give any serious thought to next year's rewards. So at the same time I doubt it will do much for your cause of more or improved ownership, I also don't think it will significantly increase the number of bad caches that should never have been placed. So, sure, give it a try.

 

12 hours ago, StopTheWorld said:

But I think it would not only be Barnyard Dawg and myself who would appreciate some complicated algorithm like, "IF the cacher has found >95% of the caches in their 50km radium, OR IF there are less than 10 unfound caches in their 50km radius, THEN all logs in the challenge period on any cache owned by that cacher earns one point towards the challenge AND THEN all FP given in the challenge period to any cache owned by that cacher earns 5 points".

I would have no problem with this if GS wanted to give it a try, but I think they try very hard to make the challenges simple so that anyone can understand it without much thought, so I doubt they use it. But to give it your best shot, maybe start a new thread on this specific idea and start bouncing ideas around about exactly how to structure the points and explain it to everyone. As you seem to understand, the devil's in the details, but I don't see any evil at the end of the road if the details can actually be worked out, so have at it!

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
On ‎10‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 3:29 PM, Team Microdot said:

 

Now that made me smile ?

I'm glad it did but that statement really describes what I think the problem is here.   Some see monsters around every corner and base their caching beliefs on that.   When stopping the monsters trumps making the game better for the vast majority of players that get it,  we wind up loosing something and IMO the game suffers.   I'm not advocating hiding under the covers and ignoring bad behavior.   I also don't think we should allow bad behavior to dictate how the game is played.   I think people put too much stock in those that choose to game the system and forget to concentrate on things that make the game better.             

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
On ‎10‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 3:27 PM, Team Microdot said:

 

Not quite.

 

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

Yes I'm basing my opinions on what I've seen as are others that have not had the same experiences.   The question is which version of reality is closer to the truth?    Are the vast majority of players trying to game the system or do most players try to play the game according to the guidelines?    Maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe we should poll the question to get a better idea of how others see the issue.       

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

I think people put too much stock in those that choose to game the system and forget to concentrate on things that make the game better.

 

I find it less satisfying to be part of something that doesn't live up to the way it's described in the brochure.

 

Hence why if I ever tell people I do geocaching these days it's in something of an apologetic manner.

 

Link to comment
Just now, Team Microdot said:

 

I find it less satisfying to be part of something that doesn't live up to the way it's described in the brochure.

 

Hence why if I ever tell people I do geocaching these days it's in something of an apologetic manner.

 

Geocaching offers an opportunity to experience something exciting.   Every individual,  who enjoys the activity, will find something in it that appeals to them for one reason or another.    the brochure describes the game as it was intended to be played.   If everyone who played took it seriously and tried to play by the guidelines,  the reasons for not liking Geocaching would be personal and have nothing to do with the game itself.   It was through Geocaching I developed a love and respect for nature.   I found an activity I enjoyed doing.   I continue to be involved in Geocaching because I want that experience to be around for others to discover.    

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Team Microdot said:

 

How they see it, or how it is?

 

If they're following your advice they probably won't be paying any attention to what's going on around them anyway.

Perception can be deceiving.    Picture this.   Your walking along a trail and you come upon someone on their hands and knees behind a bush.   Most people automatically jump to something sinister when in fact it's only a Geocacher looking for a cache.    It's human nature to have a bad experience and allow that experience to color your perception.   

 

If your looking for injustice,  you'll see it around every corner whether or not it's really there.    The funny thing is when someone eventually discovers this injustice you get the "See I told you so" attitude as if the actions of one person out of a thousand vindicates their beliefs.    I have no doubt that some experience bad cachers on a regular basis.  What I'm saying is I don't think for a minute that these cachers are the norm.  We defiantly shouldn't allow those who willfully play the game wrong to have any bearing on whether or not we implement something that would reward those who play the game right.    

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

If your looking for injustice,  you'll see it around every corner whether or not it's really there.

 

You cannot make that claim with any veracity whatsoever.

 

3 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

What I'm saying is I don't think for a minute that these cachers are the norm.

 

Or is it just that you're looking for it not to be the norm? Or not even looking at all.

 

Your own argument cuts equally both ways.

 

4 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

We defiantly shouldn't allow those who willfully play the game wrong to have any bearing on whether or not we implement something that would reward those who play the game right. 

 

That really depends on the true net gain.

Link to comment
On ‎10‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 12:18 AM, Barnyard Dawg said:

In a last attempt to get back on-topic, what could HQ do to make life a bit easier for cache owners?

I don't see anything wrong with your idea other than some may find a way to game it which IMO is not a reason to brush it aside.  

 

I'm not sure if GS could do something that would make being a cache owner easier but they could do something to make cache ownership more prestigious.       

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

 

You cannot make that claim with any veracity whatsoever.

 

 

Or is it just that you're looking for it not to be the norm? Or not even looking at all.

 

Your own argument cuts equally both ways.

 

 

That really depends on the true net gain.

So I'll ask you directly.  Do you think most Geocachers out there are trying to game the system or do most try their best to play by the rules? 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, justintim1999 said:

So I'll ask you directly.  Do you think most Geocachers out there are trying to game the system or do most try their best to play by the rules? 

 

I don't know - and nor do you.

 

But of those I know locally and through cache logs - the majority of them bend the rules whenever it suits them.

 

That's my personal experience and all I've ever pointed to because - guess what - that's all either of us has to go on.

 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

 

I don't know - and nor do you.

 

But of those I know locally and through cache logs - the majority of them bend the rules whenever it suits them.

 

That's my personal experience and all I've ever pointed to because - guess what - that's all either of us has to go on.

 

Of course you do.   You know your caches better than anyone.   In your opinion of all the people that have found your caches are most of those finds bogus or legit? 

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

But of those I know locally and through cache logs - the majority of them bend the rules whenever it suits them.

It seems that your pretty sure of the ones that are bogus.  Are you not as certain of the ones that are legit?   I looked at just one of your caches that had something like 169 finds.   Are you telling me that at least 85 of those finds are fudged?     I'm not questioning the observations you've made regarding your local caching scene.  I'm sure you have a pretty good idea of who's not playing well with others.  What I am questioning is your assentation that the majority of cachers and cache owners in your area are purposely disregarding the rules and gaming the system.   

 

Is it more likely that 1 person is cheating 169 times or 169 people are cheating once?             

Link to comment
1 minute ago, justintim1999 said:
42 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

But of those I know locally and through cache logs - the majority of them bend the rules whenever it suits them.

It seems that your pretty sure of the ones that are bogus.  Are you not as certain of the ones that are legit?   I looked at just one of your caches that had something like 169 finds.   Are you telling me that at least 85 of those finds are fudged?     I'm not questioning the observations you've made regarding your local caching scene.  I'm sure you have a pretty good idea of who's not playing well with others.  What I am questioning is your assentation that the majority of cachers and cache owners in your area are purposely disregarding the rules and gaming the system.   

 

Is it more likely that 1 person is cheating 169 times or 169 people are cheating once?   

 

Wow - the degree to which you want to frame and then re-frame the questions / twist the stats to fit your agenda is astounding! And not for the first time I have to say.

 

This is why threads on here tend to drivel on in ever-decreasing circles until a reviewer shuts them down, out of tedium as much as anything else.

 

I haven't done a detailed survey of how many times each cacher has bent the rules - nor in which specific ways and nor did I make such claims.

 

If I had then your suggestion that I'm spending far too much time looking at the negative might actually have some real basis which, I strongly suspect, would elevate you to a state of rapturous bliss.

 

Your intensive forensics really aren't going to change anything.

 

 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

 

Wow - the degree to which you want to frame and then re-frame the questions / twist the stats to fit your agenda is astounding! And not for the first time I have to say.

 

This is why threads on here tend to drivel on in ever-decreasing circles until a reviewer shuts them down, out of tedium as much as anything else.

 

I haven't done a detailed survey of how many times each cacher has bent the rules - nor in which specific ways and nor did I make such claims.

 

If I had then your suggestion that I'm spending far too much time looking at the negative might actually have some real basis which, I strongly suspect, would elevate you to a state of rapturous bliss.

 

Your intensive forensics really aren't going to change anything.

 

 

It becomes necessary when one can't get a simple question answered.   I guess the evasive nature of your responses is answer enough for me. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

It becomes necessary when one can't get a simple question answered.   I guess the evasive nature of your responses is answer enough for me. 

 

Nope. Not the slightest bit evasive.

 

I've answered all of your questions to the best of my ability and knowledge.

 

That's where it ends though 'cos this is going nowhere. Square peg. Round hole.

 

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

 

Nope. Not the slightest bit evasive.

 

I've answered all of your questions to the best of my ability and knowledge.

 

That's where it ends though 'cos this is going nowhere. Square peg. Round hole.

 

One last question.   This one is easy.   If you think that the majority of people out there are somehow cheating,  why do you hide caches and, from what I can see, take care of them meticulously?    Why go through all that work just so the majority of cachers can pad their stats?  

Link to comment
1 minute ago, justintim1999 said:
21 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

 

Nope. Not the slightest bit evasive.

 

I've answered all of your questions to the best of my ability and knowledge.

 

That's where it ends though 'cos this is going nowhere. Square peg. Round hole.

 

One last question.   This one is easy.   If you think that the majority of people out there are somehow cheating,  why do you hide caches and, from what I can see, take care of them meticulously?    Why go through all that work just so the majority of cachers can pad their stats?  

 

Because I'm a responsible cache owner and that's what I agreed to do when I signed up. Simple.

 

You'll notice that I set more Earthcaches these days because I find them more rewarding.

 

The last batch of trads I put down was mainly to get rid of some of the mass of cache containers that were cluttering up the cupboards at home.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

 

Because I'm a responsible cache owner and that's what I agreed to do when I signed up. Simple.

 

You'll notice that I set more Earthcaches these days because I find them more rewarding.

 

The last batch of trads I put down was mainly to get rid of some of the mass of cache containers that were cluttering up the cupboards at home.

I'm going to pull on the tooth a littler harder now.   I know your a responsible cache owner but why do you hide caches if you think the majority of finders out there are deadbeats?

 

You don't need to answer that because even if you won't say it I know what the real answer is.    How do I know?   Because it's the same reason I do it.   It's the same reason I think offering cache owners some sort of incentive to be good owners and put out fun caches is worth the risk of being somehow manipulated.      

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:
15 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

 

Because I'm a responsible cache owner and that's what I agreed to do when I signed up. Simple.

 

You'll notice that I set more Earthcaches these days because I find them more rewarding.

 

The last batch of trads I put down was mainly to get rid of some of the mass of cache containers that were cluttering up the cupboards at home.

I'm going to pull on the tooth a littler harder now.   I know your a responsible cache owner but why do you hide caches if you think the majority of finders out there are deadbeats?

 

Instead of focusing on tooth pulling, focus on what I said and stop making claims that I've said stuff I haven't. I find it extremely offensive and it's not a game I have any interest in playing.

 

Every time you do this your argument falls flat on its face and your credibility dives off a cliff.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On 10/25/2018 at 10:49 PM, Barnyard Dawg said:

Without going into detail, I can say that the fact that there are no eyes on the ground creates a very unhealthy situation when a conflict arises.

 

I don't have time to spend on a complete reply (I'm in South Africa and still suffering from a bit of jetlag) but I am curious about this statement.   What sort of conflicts would you expect a local reviewer to resolve, because It's not really the job for reviewers to resolve conflicts.   The primary job (even though they're not paid) for reviewers is to publish cache listings.   Occasionally there are areas for which a reviewer is added.  The justification for adding a reviewer is when the workload gets too heavy for a reviewers coverage area.  If users are creating  so many caches that the current reviewer can't handle the load then there's a possibility that GS might assign an additional reviewer.  If a regions is not experiencing a high volume of of cache submissions there there isn't a justification to add another. 

 

There are many countries (including the one I'm in now) that initially didn't have a dedicated reviewer but they've manage to grow to the point were adding one was justified.  

 

There isn't a regional GS office in Europe, yet countries like Germany and the Czech republic probably have the most vibrant geocaching communities in the world (including the US and Canada)

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On 10/27/2018 at 7:20 AM, dprovan said:

Ha-ha-ha!! The people that are questioning your solutions are the masters of criticizing geocaching. If you think your problem here is that you're running into an entrenched establishment, you're completely mistaken.

 

There are no magic solutions to your problem. The way to improve your culture is to go out and improve it. Nothing someone does in Seattle, Washington, is going to cause geocacher owners to sprout up on the other side of the globe. Geocache owners can only grow out of a supportive community of geocache seekers.

 

I wouldn't consider it a "magic solution" but one of the things that I've noticed about areas in which geocaching has become especially vibrant is the number of and frequency of geocaching events.   I'm not talking about events created for the purpose of provide others an easy way to acquire the latest promotional souvenirs, but events which provide guidance to new users, potential new cache hiders, and just a way to socialize on a frequent basis (many areas have monthly or even weekly small events).  This is actually a way that GS *can* help.  I've attended at least a couple of events which included raffles of various items, some provided by attendees at the event, and some (for example a Signal plush doll) that were provided by GS specifically for the event.  Have you (StopTheWorld) contacted Groundspeak directly and expressed your concerns and asked for help?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
On 10/30/2018 at 5:31 AM, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

I wouldn't consider it a "magic solution" but one of the things that I've noticed about areas in which geocaching has become especially vibrant is the number of and frequency of geocaching events.   I'm not talking about events created for the purpose of provide others an easy way to acquire the latest promotional souvenirs, but events which provide guidance to new users, potential new cache hiders, and just a way to socialize on a frequent basis (many areas have monthly or even weekly small events).  This is actually a way that GS *can* help.  I've attended at least a couple of events which included raffles of various items, some provided by attendees at the event, and some (for example a Signal plush doll) that were provided by GS specifically for the event.  Have you (StopTheWorld) contacted Groundspeak directly and expressed your concerns and asked for help?

No, I haven't,  but I think Barnyard Dawg has. He's petitioned for many things for Malaysia (he has more vested interest, being a long-term resident, than do I),  and I know he managed to secure the country souvenir (BIG win) and a handful of "Magic, The Gathering" trackables. That's probably all I think,  but possibly not a bad haul for a small place. We never have reviewers turn up to events to give incentives,  though once the Irish owner of (is it Europe's oldest cache? ) turned up at an event and handed out a few goodies. 

Barnyard Dawg used to hand out free bison tubes and nanos at events, and I always give some sort of prizes,  though never that generous (they are pretty expensive out here! ). None of these things seems to have spurred a furious rash of new COS though. 

We still seem to be obsessing over increasing the number of COS in Malaysia and I'm not sure that was the initial question. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, StopTheWorld said:

<...>

 

We still seem to be obsessing over increasing the number of COS in Malaysia and I'm not sure that was the initial question. 

 

What was, then?

I note that I have yet to hear any response on the ground to my suggestions about increasing hobby-activity beyond the intimation that I'm an arrogant American that doesn't care about poor foreigners.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
10 hours ago, StopTheWorld said:

We still seem to be obsessing over increasing the number of COS in Malaysia and I'm not sure that was the initial question.

I don't mean to derail your attempt to get back on topic, so feel free to criticize my reaction, but here's why, from my point of view, we're still on topic.

 

The OP explained that there weren't many caches where he was and suggested a way or two to reward/encourage owners globally to help with that problem. The response from the global community was that in places where there were enough COs, rewarding owners tends to do nothing more interesting than encouraging the wrong kinds of owners, namely ones planting caches for the rewards without actually having much interest in the caches themselves. That led to a larger discussion about how to solve the OP's actually problem. I claim we have isolated that his problem is, in fact, that there aren't enough COs in Malaysia and he'd like to find ways to increase the number. So that's why I say we're still just trying to help the OP, not obsessing on something unrelated to the initial question.

 

Is that really so different than your appraisal?

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
11 hours ago, StopTheWorld said:

We still seem to be obsessing over increasing the number of COS in Malaysia and I'm not sure that was the initial question. 

 

Couldn't it be that constructive plans to increase the number of cache owners in areas lacking seems more practical to others,  than creating a world-wide "CO incentive"  just so those currently affected are able to participate in promotions/challenges like others in higher populations ?    :) 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
22 hours ago, StopTheWorld said:

No, I haven't,  but I think Barnyard Dawg has. He's petitioned for many things for Malaysia (he has more vested interest, being a long-term resident, than do I),  and I know he managed to secure the country souvenir (BIG win) and a handful of "Magic, The Gathering" trackables. That's probably all I think,  but possibly not a bad haul for a small place. We never have reviewers turn up to events to give incentives,  though once the Irish owner of (is it Europe's oldest cache? ) turned up at an event and handed out a few goodies. 

Barnyard Dawg used to hand out free bison tubes and nanos at events, and I always give some sort of prizes,  though never that generous (they are pretty expensive out here! ). None of these things seems to have spurred a furious rash of new COS though. 

We still seem to be obsessing over increasing the number of COS in Malaysia and I'm not sure that was the initial question. 

 

Thanks to Barnyard Dawg then for encouraging GS to create a souvenir for Malaysia.  I qualified for it in 2012 when I found a few caches in Kuching (one was a FTF, 9400 miles from home).

That cache was owned by a geocacher named BernGPS, who I believe is also from KL.  The cache in Ireland you're thinking of is Europe's First.  I have been to Dublin twice with the intention of finding it but but times couldn't manage to get on the train to the town of Bray, where it is located. 

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
On 10/26/2018 at 9:18 PM, Barnyard Dawg said:

In a last attempt to get back on-topic, what could HQ do to make life a bit easier for cache owners?

 

My vote would be to improve the hiding a cache feature. Because of hidden coordinates of some cache types the ability to first find potential areas then find a final good quality placement is near impossible in an area with a lot of those types of caches.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, MNTA said:

My vote would be to improve the hiding a cache feature. Because of hidden coordinates of some cache types the ability to first find potential areas then find a final good quality placement is near impossible in an area with a lot of those types of caches.

How do you suggest that Groundspeak support this without allowing people to battleship the locations of hidden stages, like the final stages of multi-caches or the solutions of puzzles?

Link to comment
14 hours ago, niraD said:

How do you suggest that Groundspeak support this without allowing people to battleship the locations of hidden stages, like the final stages of multi-caches or the solutions of puzzles?

Quit worrying about other folks cheating. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

 

Spoken like someone who never invested any effort whatsoever putting together interesting and challenging puzzles and multis.

 

 

 

Well then I'll let you suggest something. All I'm saying is the existing method is awful and all I ever hear is a protect my hard puzzles from cheating. Honestly I have over 1000 puzzles in my ignore list. I have no desire to solve half of them and don't care to cheat either. This game is a basically a personal experience there is no prizes or awards given out other than digital smileys and now souvenirs. The current mechanism is awful and turned me off from hiding more due to the difficulty and the process. 

 

So please stop trying to protect something that honestly does not matter in the grand scheme of things. Cheating exists its a fact and should not be used as an excuse to prevent improving other aspects of the game.  But if you have a suggestion feel free to offer it would love to hear it. 

 

Don't get me wrong. There are great puzzles out there though a lot of them are crazy hard and require a very specific way of thinking or pickup on clues that I just choose to ignore them. The problem I see with Puzzle caches is that if I'm traveling to a new area unless I planned weeks in advance there is no way I will find your puzzle should I visit England. Almost all other cache types I can travel to say Texas and be able to pull up my app and with little or some effort be able to find anything but those "?" so as a result the filter is applied.

 

You know you could have a mechanism to reject a found it log unless the puzzle was solved if you so choose.  GS Could help here as well I am sure.

 

Back to the Original subject. What can be done to create incentives for cache owners. Make the hiding process just as easy as the finding process. The rest of the world will adjust. 

Link to comment
9 hours ago, MNTA said:

So please stop trying to protect something that honestly does not matter TO ME in the grand scheme of things.

 

Fixed it for you - my bold.

 

It matters to other people, you know, the ones who have worked hard to put an experience together, which isn't you - obviously.

 

Hence why your comment isn't particularly welcomed by those who have.

 

It sounds as if you please yourself with regards to these horrid puzzles and multis by avoiding them - and that's absolutely fine, you won't hear me complaining about that at all.

 

And if the only argument you have is the old in the grand scheme of things there's an awful lot more we could throw on that particular bonfire - including geocaching in its entirety. Maybe you'd be completely happy if we did that, I don't know.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Holy smokes. So much...

 

18 hours ago, MNTA said:

Well then I'll let you suggest something.

 

Haven't you been reading this thread? LOTS of suggestions, just none that DIRECTLY support what the OP wants.

 

18 hours ago, MNTA said:

All I'm saying is the existing method is awful

 

"Awful"? Really? what does that mean? What's your definition of the strong term "awful", and WHAT existing method are you talking about? "Existing method" of what? You don't actually mention anything. That's a pretty generic statement that says...nothing.

 

18 hours ago, MNTA said:

...and all I ever hear is a protect my hard puzzles from cheating.

 

"All you ever hear"? You don't ever read anything else here in the forums about Puzzle Caches, how much fun they can be, how much work goes into them? How people get invested in them? Based on the rest of your post, you obviously have a thing against Puzzles, so again, this statement is merely hyperbole which actually says...nothing.

 

18 hours ago, MNTA said:

Honestly I have over 1000 puzzles in my ignore list. I have no desire to solve half of them and don't care to cheat either.

 

We get it. You hate puzzles. But, why would you attempt to denigrate a part of the hobby that others love? You admittedly don't even have a dog in this fight - you put 1,000 puzzles on your IGNORE list!

Oh, yeah, you said that puzzles are bad because they make it hard to place a traditional cache when you don't know where the puzzles are. Gee, sorry other players are in your way. That's awful.

 

18 hours ago, MNTA said:

This game is a basically a personal experience there is no prizes or awards given out other than digital smileys and now souvenirs.

 

If this is how you think, then my friend with all your considerable experience, you may have missed the best part of the game. A geocache is a transaction: I hide it; you find it. Without either of us, it's meaningless. This is the farthest thing from a 'personal experience'.

 

Don't incorrectly apply the principle that within the guidelines, you can play the game as you see fit. That doesn't make it a 'personal experience'.

 

The CO & the cacher are partners; a team established on the fly for the express purpose of the experience of a single cache. If you find my cache within the guidelines, we both win. If you game the system or "cheat" as you put it, then the transaction and the partnership is a failure. It's called "Social Contracts", and it applies to hobbies like geocaching as much as it applies to citizenship.

 

18 hours ago, MNTA said:

Cheating exists its a fact and should not be used as an excuse to prevent improving other aspects of the game.

 

Wow. Do nothing about cheating? Don't make it harder to cheat? Or actually, in this case your position is to change existing aspects to make it easier to cheat on parts of the hobby that you don't like because...people cheat?

 

18 hours ago, MNTA said:

Don't get me wrong. There are great puzzles out there though a lot of them are crazy hard and require a very specific way of thinking or pickup on clues that I just choose to ignore them

 

Then leave the concept of puzzles alone! Keep ignoring them! Don't say "I don't like them, so let's make it so that they're not so hard."

I didn't do well in math in High School, but I would never advocate for eliminating algebra class.

 

18 hours ago, MNTA said:

The problem I see with Puzzle caches is that if I'm traveling to a new area unless I planned weeks in advance there is no way I will find your puzzle should I visit England. Almost all other cache types I can travel to say Texas and be able to pull up my app and with little or some effort be able to find anything but those "?" so as a result the filter is applied.

 

EXACTLY! Thank you for getting it. Everyone who puts out a difficult puzzle or a significant Multi for that matter, does so with the understanding that LOCALS are the ones most likely to go after them, not TOURISTS.

 

And, while we're on the subject, why aren't you saying the same things about Multi-Caches? Don't they make it harder to place a cache as well?

 

18 hours ago, MNTA said:

You know you could have a mechanism to reject a found it log unless the puzzle was solved if you so choose.

 

That's a silly statement, and you most likely know it. That's "Puzzle Caches 101".

 

18 hours ago, MNTA said:

Back to the Original subject. What can be done to create incentives for cache owners. Make the hiding process just as easy as the finding process. The rest of the world will adjust.

 

"The rest of the world will adjust....." to you, you mean.

 

You know, there's a very good reason why you can't create a 'hide' from the phone app. Groundspeak knows full well the difference between cachers and COs.

Edited by TeamRabbitRun
  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
On 11/1/2018 at 1:52 PM, NYPaddleCacher said:

...

That cache was owned by a geocacher named BernGPS, who I believe is also from KL.  ...

 I was "geocaching" with BernGPS on the weekend! (I use inverted commas, because he did the finding, and we both did some hiding, but I'm unconvinced that watching others find caches or hiding new caches actually qualifies as "geocaching" activity). Bern GPS is still a powerhouse in Malaysia, one of the biggest COs, both in quantity and FP. Great maintenance, one of the few COs in Sabah and Sarawak, lovely guy, and one of the highest numbers of Malaysian caches found, still travelling around the country leaving a trail of smilies on his map.

Link to comment
On 11/3/2018 at 10:33 AM, MNTA said:

 

My vote would be to improve the hiding a cache feature. Because of hidden coordinates of some cache types the ability to first find potential areas then find a final good quality placement is near impossible in an area with a lot of those types of caches.

Oh yes, I would absolutely agree! There are some other little tweaks that would make listing easier too. What about having the html tools available even when you go back to edit? It must be somewhat intimidating for new COs to have to learn html coding to doa  simple listing.
Having said that, in my current location, hidden stages is not an issue at all :D There are certain benefits of having zero unfound/ not owned caches for miles! I know the location of every stage, every final!

Link to comment
On 11/4/2018 at 9:07 AM, MNTA said:

So please stop trying to protect something that honestly does not matter in the grand scheme of things. Cheating exists its a fact and should not be used as an excuse to prevent improving other aspects of the game.  But if you have a suggestion feel free to offer it would love to hear it.

 

Don't get me wrong. There are great puzzles out there though a lot of them are crazy hard and require a very specific way of thinking or pickup on clues that I just choose to ignore them. The problem I see with Puzzle caches is that if I'm traveling to a new area unless I planned weeks in advance there is no way I will find your puzzle should I visit England. Almost all other cache types I can travel to say Texas and be able to pull up my app and with little or some effort be able to find anything but those "?" so as a result the filter is applied.

 

You know you could have a mechanism to reject a found it log unless the puzzle was solved if you so choose.  GS Could help here as well I am sure.

 

Back to the Original subject. What can be done to create incentives for cache owners. Make the hiding process just as easy as the finding process. The rest of the world will adjust. 


Actually, often the method people use for cheating is so ingenious, they deserve the smilie anyway! Like writing their own code to break a cipher or solve a new type of puzzle.
There are other ways of ensuring the puzzle is solved properly. I have a couple of hides in KL that the hide is so sneaky, they can probably pinpoint the general area without solving the cipher but are going to work really really hard to comb the area to find the final. OR they could do it the easy way and solve the puzzle, because when they get into the geochecker, they will get clear instructions on how to find the cache, maybe even a spoiler photo. So, whether they "cheat" or whether they go in the front door like I intended, the difficulty is about the same, so I mind not how they get their signature into the book.
To tell you the truth, if they ask a friend to explain exactly how to find the cache and cheat all the way, I don't mind that either, they are only cheating themselves. If I hear about it, I'll likely delete their log (that's part of the game too), but I'm not going to have anxiety attacks over someone whose trigonometry and persistence is so skilled that they could punch in dozens of co-ordinates and then use the data to manage to interpolate a set of coordinates for my puzzle cache, then make their way to their approximate GZ and find the cache. Good on them is what I say! As for me, I'll go in the front door! But then, I don't take this whole thing as seriously as some others. Sorry.

Edit: I have just read TeamRabbitRun's post all about the "social transaction" aspect, and I get it. The cheaters do detract from the game, and spoil that transaction from the CO's perspective. For that reason, reducing the amount of cheating is desirable BUT... where is the sweet spot? Coming from a country that thinks it can legislate every aspect of human behaviour, even happiness, I would hate to see the "nanny state" mentality do the same to geocaching. There's a point where you have to let go and let people be dishonest asses. It's come up in another vein already in this thread- just about everybody twists the rules in some way (logging found on a throw-down, saving logging until a later  more suitable date, PAF assistance, gee, once I even accepted a friend's offer to name his new cache to fill a final, impossible spot in a challenge I was trying to complete!). We usually convince ourselves it's not cheating, it's just playing the game to our advantage (I for one certainly don't cheat!) but we can give ourselves so much grief by applying our concept of fair play to others. It's easier and more fun for me to just to let go a little, even if it means a few people who I consider less-than-honourable, get a less-than-deserved smilie. I've ceased to expect the world to be fair (and as a result also fail to fight for what I maybe should) but if we aimed for fair, those of us in the quieter geocaching spots would just give up now. In fact, probably everybody would. Group logging, power trails where you don't even put each cache back in the same spot but the next spot along, virtual rewards, signing at the top of the tree for the person standing at the bottom- the game is riddled with rule-twisting that I don't like, but it doesn't affect my game. I know this is a totally separate topic and has been discussed ad nauseum though. Sorry to digress.

Edited by StopTheWorld
added reply to further comments that were lower in the thread
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...