Challenge caches

[+thebruce0]

I seriously don't understand how a cache owner can require that someone qualify before signing the logsheet, as the owner can't fundamentally verify, 24/7, that no one has signed the logsheet who doesn't yet qualify. That would take an unbelievable amount of OCD to repeatedly visit the cache and check the logsheet and verify all the names (let alone recognize that some may be unreadable, or group names).  It just seems to me completely unreasonable to require that, and makes perfect sense that owners can't require that in a listing. It's not just a rule, it's just... common sense.

 

Now of course, as with any challenge, the cache can't be logged as found online until qualified. That's the ALR. But signing the logsheet after providing qualifications? I can't see how taht can be enforced at all. So it's good that HQ is requesting such wording be removed if discovered.

[+hzoi]

1 minute ago, thebruce0 said:

how a cache owner can require that someone qualify before signing the logsheet

 

Back in the day, they could do it by not revealing the actual coordinates of the cache before receiving proof of qualification, so unless you asked a previous finder, you didn't know where to go.  Many of the original challenges (Delorme, county, Fizzy/Well Rounded Cacher) still have bogus coordinates and don't make the final waypoint visible - four I found last year were the Virginia city, county, and virtual challenges and the Maryland county challenge.

 

I completed one older challenge that not only had bogus coordinates, but the real coordinates were behind the CO's mailbox - and you had to give him a window of time so he'd put it out for you.  Otherwise even if you got the coordinates from someone else, there would be no cache for you to sign.  Would this fly as a new challenge?  Heck no.  Is it still being run this way?  Um...yeah, kind of looks that way from recent logs.  

[+thebruce0]

3 minutes ago, hzoi said:

22 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

how a cache owner can require that someone qualify before signing the logsheet

 

Back in the day, they could do it by not revealing the actual coordinates of the cache before receiving proof of qualification, so unless you asked a previous finder, you didn't know where to go.

 

Yeah I figured that was the one way that would be mentioned. I didn't include it, because as you say, you can still sign it first. There's no reasonable way for a CO to require that. How would HQ dispute that? "Sorry dude, had to delete your log; you'll have to go and re-find it to re-sign it now that you've qualified." ?

 

5 minutes ago, hzoi said:

I completed one older challenge that not only had bogus coordinates, but the real coordinates were behind the CO's mailbox - and you had to give him a window of time so he'd put it out for you.  Otherwise even if you got the coordinates from someone else, there would be no cache for you to sign.  Would this fly as a new challenge?  Heck no.  Is it still being run this way?  Um...yeah, kind of looks that way from recent logs.  

 

That... is like a moving cache, no? The CO shouldn't just be able to remove a cache and put it to be found whenever they please. That seems entirely anti-geocaching.  Something tells me if that's still how it's done there's something shady going on.  If that methodology has been grandfathered, I ... dumbfounded.  I mean, at worst, it could be a Not Available 24/7, and the CO could say, lock the gate when off hours; but when on hours it could still be found and signed.

Dunno, that challenge cache is questionable at best, IMO.

[+arisoft]

1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

That... is like a moving cache, no? The CO shouldn't just be able to remove a cache and put it to be found whenever they please. That seems entirely anti-geocaching.

 

If nothing prevents signing the cache before the challenge is met, what prevents the CO to remove and disable the cache before the challenge is met?

[+thebruce0]

3 minutes ago, arisoft said:

If nothing prevents signing the cache before the challenge is met, what prevents the CO to remove and disable the cache before the challenge is met?

 

?

Exactly? But a CO shouldn't able to just remove a cache on a whim, while leaving it still listed as active and available to be found, that's the point. And how would they know someone is planning to sign it who hasn't qualified in order to remove it anyway? It's just way too strange, impractical, and unreasonable a requirement in the first place.

[+The Jester]

30 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 

?

Exactly? But a CO shouldn't able to just remove a cache on a whim, while leaving it still listed as active and available to be found, that's the point. And how would they know someone is planning to sign it who hasn't qualified in order to remove it anyway? It's just way too strange, impractical, and unreasonable a requirement in the first place.

I think you have it backwards, it's removed until someone has qualified to find & sign (it may even be you have tell the CO you want find it, then he'll put it out.).  But from my experience with my challange cache, sometimes the amount of time between qualify and find can be months.

[+thebruce0]

4 minutes ago, The Jester said:

I think you have it backwards, it's removed until someone has qualified to find & sign (it may even be you have tell the CO you want find it, then he'll put it out.).  But from my experience with my challange cache, sometimes the amount of time between qualify and find can be months.

 

Ah, right.  Still, goes against the whole idea of geocaches being out there to be found, so not surprisingly they don't allow that level of ALR. If a cache is listed online and active to be found, you shouldn't have to contact the owner to place the container for you to find it.  That would be the only way to 'enforce' the qualify-then-sign requirement (although others could find and sign it while it was placed for the qualifier to sign).  Glad it's no longer allowed, and not grandfathered.

[+arisoft]

2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

It's just way too strange, impractical, and unreasonable a requirement in the first place.

 

Yes it is strange etc. but I have seen this with some mystery caches. The cache was available only for the ones who solved the mystery. For others it was disabled. Never seen with challenges but in theory why not - until it gets reported.

[+thebruce0]

6 minutes ago, arisoft said:

I have seen this with some mystery caches. The cache was available only for the ones who solved the mystery. For others it was disabled. Never seen with challenges but in theory why not - until it gets reported. 

 

Uh yeah, "it's not wrong unless you get caught".  Nope, that won't fly.

[+funkymunkyzone]

18 hours ago, Deepdiggingmole said:

I plan to contact the CO and advise them of the issues around their current requirements and HQs views on that, if there is a negative response from their end where would I report this to ?.

Just sign the challenge cache log and don't worry about the CO.  There's a good enough likelihood that the CO is happy and has just forgotten to change that wording on their cache.

[+The Jester]

7 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

Yes it is strange etc. but I have seen this with some mystery caches. The cache was available only for the ones who solved the mystery. For others it was disabled. Never seen with challenges but in theory why not - until it gets reported.

For the first few HQ's (they've moved 4 or 5 times) the HQ cache was, at least, disabled until someone was scheduled for a tour, then it was made available.

[+papu66]

8 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

Yes it is strange etc. but I have seen this with some mystery caches. The cache was available only for the ones who solved the mystery. For others it was disabled. Never seen with challenges but in theory why not - until it gets reported.

I'm not sure I understood correctly. Surely, anyone who shows up with the correct coordinates can find and log the cache. Was there a quiz?

 

If the cache is available by appointment only and otherwise 'disabled' it should be reported (not available to all, contact with other player required).

 

39 minutes ago, The Jester said:

For the first few HQ's (they've moved 4 or 5 times) the HQ cache was, at least, disabled until someone was scheduled for a tour, then it was made available.

 

Sorry, noob question but what's the 'HQ cache' ?

 

EDT:

Got it, you mean Geocaching Headquarters. That's just one cache of it's own type so they can have whatever requirements they like without invalidating the rules for challenge caches.

Edited March 12, 2019 by papu66

[+hzoi]

16 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

16 hours ago, hzoi said:

16 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

how a cache owner can require that someone qualify before signing the logsheet

 

Back in the day, they could do it by not revealing the actual coordinates of the cache before receiving proof of qualification, so unless you asked a previous finder, you didn't know where to go.

 

Yeah I figured that was the one way that would be mentioned. I didn't include it, because as you say, you can still sign it first. There's no reasonable way for a CO to require that. How would HQ dispute that? "Sorry dude, had to delete your log; you'll have to go and re-find it to re-sign it now that you've qualified." ?

 

Based on Rock Chalk's post, HQ would back the finder, not the CO.

 

16 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

16 hours ago, hzoi said:

I completed one older challenge that not only had bogus coordinates, but the real coordinates were behind the CO's mailbox - and you had to give him a window of time so he'd put it out for you.  Otherwise even if you got the coordinates from someone else, there would be no cache for you to sign.  Would this fly as a new challenge?  Heck no.  Is it still being run this way?  Um...yeah, kind of looks that way from recent logs.  

 

That... is like a moving cache, no? The CO shouldn't just be able to remove a cache and put it to be found whenever they please. That seems entirely anti-geocaching.  Something tells me if that's still how it's done there's something shady going on.  If that methodology has been grandfathered, I ... dumbfounded.  I mean, at worst, it could be a Not Available 24/7, and the CO could say, lock the gate when off hours; but when on hours it could still be found and signed.

Dunno, that challenge cache is questionable at best, IMO.

 

Yeah, I did not include this as a good example of how to operate a challenge cache, but as an example of how older challenges are not being adapted to the new norm.  Really, I'm surprised that no one has complained given the change in the challenge cache guidelines.  Maybe those who are working for the challenge assume it's OK to grandfather this.  Until someone complains, I don't know whether the CO would realize the need to update, either. 

[+arisoft]

4 hours ago, papu66 said:

If the cache is available by appointment only and otherwise 'disabled' it should be reported (not available to all, contact with other player required).

 

Nobody reported. If you report the cache it does not help to get the extra point because the cache will be archived. For a player the only winning situation is to play as required.

[+31BMSG]

19 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

Ah, right.  Still, goes against the whole idea of geocaches being out there to be found, so not surprisingly they don't allow that level of ALR. If a cache is listed online and active to be found, you shouldn't have to contact the owner to place the container for you to find it.  That would be the only way to 'enforce' the qualify-then-sign requirement (although others could find and sign it while it was placed for the qualifier to sign).  Glad it's no longer allowed, and not grandfathered.

I suspect there are a few that are grandfathered although maybe not officially. I qualified for a challenge last October that took over a year to complete but since the holder of the container is more than 400 miles away I've yet to sign. The container is never actually placed, you have to meet with the cacher in order to sign the log but after a 10 hour round trip in December, where I came up empty handed, I've decided to let this one go. 

[+thebruce0]

7 hours ago, hzoi said:

Based on Rock Chalk's post, HQ would back the finder, not the CO.

Exactly.

 

7 hours ago, hzoi said:

Really, I'm surprised that no one has complained given the change in the challenge cache guidelines.  Maybe those who are working for the challenge assume it's OK to grandfather this.  Until someone complains, I don't know whether the CO would realize the need to update, either. 

Yeah it'll probably continue until someone complains and reports.

 

7 hours ago, arisoft said:

Nobody reported. If you report the cache it does not help to get the extra point because the cache will be archived. For a player the only winning situation is to play as required.

Not if it provides a bad experience. And that's why that requirement is no longer allowed. But yes, many players will just continue to play as required - likely because the alternative is irrelevant (they already qualify, so they can go and log it - it only becomes an issue for someone who wants to find and sign it before qualifying; and it would take one of those people to step up and report it)

 

1 hour ago, 31BMSG said:

I suspect there are a few that are grandfathered although maybe not officially.

Yeah, "grandfathered unofficially" means Shhhh! Don't tell anyone...