Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
BraillerCD

Does the Mystery at the Museum "Penalize" Geocachers?

Recommended Posts

This may be sour grapes, but because I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me. So I have to travel a far greater distance just to grab these caches. Geocaching has created a  souvenir series that  penalizes those of us who have caches a while. 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I don't see any penalties being applied. Many of us are in the same boat. I've had to learn the ins and outs of caching with my phone for this but will stick with my GPSr. I've had to do a bit, no a lot, of driving and have more to come to finish off the challenge.  I've missed plenty of souvenirs because I wouldn't, couldn't or didn't jump through the required hoops but at no time have I felt penalised.

Spare a thought for the poor cacher in cache poor areas who would have loved to join in.

Edited by colleda
Clarification of point
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
51 minutes ago, colleda said:

I don't see any penalties being applied. Many of us are in the same boat. I've had to learn the ins and outs of caching with my phone for this but will stick with my GPSr. I've had to do a bit, no a lot, of driving and have more to come to finish off the challenge.  I've missed plenty of souvenirs because I wouldn't, couldn't or didn't jump through the required hoops but at no time have I felt penalised.

Spare a thought for the poor cacher in cache poor areas who would have loved to join in.

 

The penalty is in the travel required and of course the time that entails. So far I've managed a whole 3 caches in this promotion, the detective and two shadow clues, using what were the closest caches to home that would serve the purpose, but getting to those and back took 146km of driving. With 54 more required to complete all the souvenirs, my car, which was serviced last week, would almost need another by the end of it.

 

This also comes on top of the more recent promotions which have all been numbers chases, the Hidden Creatures in particular which needed 100 finds for the top level (I got as far as the mermaid with 11 finds). The Cache Carnival could be done with a smaller number of 50+ FP caches but they pretty much only exist in the big city tourist hotspots here so it still required a lot of travelling. Planetary Pursuit had another high find count target, helped a bit with some D/T multipliers, but I only scraped through that thanks to all the geoart caches for the nearby mega which coincided with the promotion. Even starting with a reasonable density of nearby unfound caches, a few of this style of promotion back to back soon uses that up, especially now that the promotions are quarterly rather than annual.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

The penalty is in the travel required and of course the time that entails.

 

How is that a penalty? You don't have to find every geocache earn every souvenir.  It feels unfair, and it's unfortunate, but it's certainly not a penalty.

 

11 hours ago, BraillerCD said:

This may be sour grapes, but because I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me. So I have to travel a far greater distance just to grab these caches. Geocaching has created a  souvenir series that  penalizes those of us who have caches a while. 

 

It's not a penalty. You're not losing anything. But you may be losing out on getting something you don't have to have. So you have a choice to let that bother you or not (or to what extent it bothers you).  It is quite unfortunate that not every person on the planet can participate equally in every single souvenir promotion (I'm not exaggerating - in an ideal world that would be possible, but the nature of geocaching does not make that possible).  Every souvenir favours someone more than someone else.


 

  • Upvote 5
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 

It's not a penalty. You're not losing anything. But you may be losing out on getting something you don't have to have. So you have a choice to let that bother you or not (or to what extent it bothers you).  It is quite unfortunate that not every person on the planet can participate equally in every single souvenir promotion (I'm not exaggerating - in an ideal world that would be possible, but the nature of geocaching does not make that possible).  Every souvenir favours someone more than someone else.

 

 

Idunno, according to OED one of the definitions of "penalty" is:

 

"In various sports and games: a disadvantage imposed upon a competitor or team in accordance with the rules of a particular game."

 

Sounds like a penalty to me.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, ZeppelinDT said:

"In various sports and games: a disadvantage imposed upon a competitor or team in accordance with the rules of a particular game."

 

Sounds like a penalty to me.

 

Competition?

No.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, thebruce0 said:

 

Competition?

No.

 

It doesn't say competition.  It says "sports and games".  It does say "competitor", but I read that as being used in the sense of "player" (i.e., somebody playing the game).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

"Upon a competitor or team [competing]"

 

You can make geocaching competitive, but it is fundamentally not. Not against other people. Against yourself, maybe, if you're trying to improve something.  There is no loss, there is no restriction on capability that is otherwise standard in this hobby, because this is a side-game on top of geocaching that no one is required to play, and by not playing you are not admitted loss or failure.

No, it's not a "penalty", and word games won't make it so.

 

It's telling that some people notably feel "hurt" by not being able to complete the promo period to earn all the souvenirs. Complaints about not being able to participate (as much as other people who are more fortunate) are certainly worth hearing and taking into consideration for the design of the next promo, and I hope HQ does.

 

But buzzwords that make it sound like Groundspeak is somehow punishing geocachers are just ludicrous! Sorry, I can't see it another way. Also sorry for sorry, I'm Canadian.

Edited by thebruce0
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, thebruce0 said:

"Upon a competitor or team [competing]"

 

You're just reading in the word "competing" but that isn't part of the definition.  I agree that caching is not really supposed to be "competitive", but it's still a game that has players.  I get where you're coming from, but it sounds like you disagree more with the definition of "penalty".  All I'm saying is that under the definition as given in OED, the term "penalty" sure seems to apply.  Whether or not geocaching is "competitive" is really aside from the point.  As I read that definition, it applies regardless of competitiveness.  I see the word "competitor" as being a synonym for "player" and not as being strictly limited to actual "competitions".

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

...because this is a side-game on top of geocaching that no one is required to play...

 

I'm also not sure I understand this part of the argument.  No-one is required to do any of this.  Geocaching isn't mandatory.  I mean you could just as easily say that nobody is "required" to go to Events, but does that make Events a "side" game too?  This is just one aspect in a game with many features.  It seems just as much a part of Geocaching as any other part.

Share this post


Link to post

Once again, word games.

There is NO penalty. Find another word that, as I said, doesn't make Groundspeak out to be punishing geocachers.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Once again, word games.

There is NO penalty. Find another word that, as I said, doesn't make Groundspeak out to be punishing geocachers.

 

It seems odd to me that your initial response was to quibble over whether or not the word "penalty" applies to this situation, but then you also say that using the word is just playing "word games".  Imo, your definition of "penalty" to argue that it doesn't apply here is the word game.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, ZeppelinDT said:

I'm also not sure I understand this part of the argument.  No-one is required to do any of this.  Geocaching isn't mandatory.

 

It's a side-game because it's 1 month temporary bonus add-on layer to the current and unchanged hobby of geocaching. Of course "geocaching" encompasses this because it's all run on same service. That's why it's a side-game. It's a temporary mecahnic that lets you earn extra souvenirs, which get progressively harder. Not everyone can earn every souvenir. Sometimes the 'easy' souvenirs are harder for one person than another. This isn't a game of strictly equal opportunity. That would be impossible world-wide.

 

9 minutes ago, ZeppelinDT said:

It seems odd to me that your initial response was to quibble over whether or not the word "penalty" applies to this situation, but then you also say that using the word is just playing "word games".

 

No, using the word isn't a word game - trying to play with definitions to make a word support a premise, which it does not, is.

No one is being penalized in this promotion, and you haven't demonstrated how it is.  You have demonstrated that you are saddened, upset, bothered, that your circumstances make you unable to participate as much as you would like to participate in order to earn all the bonus souvenirs being offered.  Some people don't want them. Some people do. Some people had the energy and ability to complete the entire promo in one day - some who were overhwelmed with geocache qualifiers, some who were not and put in the extra work because they chose to.  Some don't care, some ignored it all. Nowhere did Groundspeak say "Hey, these people don't deserve to the ability to gain all the souvenirs, so let's make a promotional game mechanic that makes it harder, better yet impossible, for these people to do so".

Circumstances that make something in life that you might want to have difficult to get does not mean you are being explicitly penalized so you don't get it easily.

 

As I said, it's unfortunate that not everyone has the ability or circumstance to have the opportunity to earn these bonus digital badges for their profile in this hobby. The more GS can do to make a game fun for more people the better. But not everyone has to find every geocache, and not everyone has to earn every souvenir.

 

It's not a penalty. Find another word.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

It's a side-game because it's 1 month temporary bonus add-on layer to the current and unchanged hobby of geocaching. Of course "geocaching" encompasses this because it's all run on same service. That's why it's a side-game

 

The souvenir isn't temporary.  The souvenir seems just as much of a permanent stat as find count or any other stat.

 

If this is how you define side games then what about the Virtual Rewards?  Are those "side games" too?  Those were temporary add-ons that could only be hidden during a limited promotional period.

 

It's also completely absurd to call the geocaching "unchanged".  The game is constantly being changed.  New caches types get added.  Old cache types get retired.  Rules fluctuate.  Promotions come and go.  Why do you get to be the final authority of what counts as part of the "real" game and what is just a "side" game?

 

11 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

No, using the word isn't a word game - trying to play with definitions to make a word support a premise, which it does not, is.

 

The problem with this is that I fundamentally disagree with you over what the word "penalty" means.  I do understand where you're coming from, but I don't think it's nearly as objective or as black-and-white as you claim it is.  I think reasonable people could disagree over whether or not this qualifies as a penalty.  I don't think you're necessarily "wrong" in saying that it is not a penalty, but I also don't think it's "wrong" to say it is a penalty.

 

What your argument seems to essentially boil down to is that you disagree with how I interpret the word "penalty", then you assert that your definition is the objectively correct one, and then anybody else who interprets the word differently is just playing a "word game".  It's kind of a circular argument because it's only a "word game" if we pre-suppose that your interpretation is the correct one.

 

11 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

You have demonstrated that you are saddened, upset, bothered, that your circumstances make you unable to participate as much as you would like to participate in order to earn all the bonus souvenirs being offered. 

 

That's actually not true at all.  I think it's kind of a dumb promotion, but I don't anticipate having any trouble completing it.  I just recently moved to a new area where I haven't done much caching and there are plenty of quick and easy caches for me to go find.  I'm in a position where it will be relatively simple to get all the souvenirs.  This isn't personal for me in any way.  I just completely understand the perspective of the people who are affected by it, and I think there's an entirely rational and justified basis for phrasing it as a penalty.

Edited by ZeppelinDT
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, ZeppelinDT said:

The problem with this is that I fundamentally agree with you over what the word "penalty" means.  I do understand where you're coming from, but I don't think it's nearly as objective or as black-and-white as you claim it is.  I think reasonable people could disagree over whether or not this qualifies as a penalty.  I don't think you're necessary "wrong" is saying that it is not a penalty, but I also don't think it's "wrong" to say it is a penalty.

 

What your argument seems to essentially boil down to is that you disagree with how I interpret the word "penalty", then you assert that your definition is the objectively correct one, and then anybody else who interprets the word differently is just playing a "word game".  It's kind of a circular argument because it's only a "word game" if we pre-supposed that your interpretation is the correct one.

 

Oh my. The first assertion made was that people are being penalized. I can't tell people what they are feeling is wrong, nor do I disagree with the sentiment. I'm telling you that by definintion no one is being penalized. Find a better word to describe the action, not the feeling, because no matter how you try to describe it, no one is being explicitly penalized by Groundspeak!

 

Being "penalized" would be having HQ disable your ability to log finds for a period; disabling your forum post ability.  Heck, even having a false find log deleted by a CO or HQ isn't a penalty, it's a correction of a falsehood - but it might earn you a penalty if you demonstrate a habit of falsely logging finds.  Geocachers DO get penalized!  And no, this promotion does not penalize people just for being geocachers in less dense geocaching areas.

 

What about those people who live in remote areas with 5 geocaches within 100kms? Man, they MUST have done SOMETHING wrong to get such a penalty from GCHQ!

 

Absolutely, I believe "penalty" is absurd to describe what IS happening (not the way people feel) with this promotion.

Find another word.

 

 

12 minutes ago, ZeppelinDT said:

I just completely understand the perspective of the people who are affected by it, and I think there's an entirely rational and justified basis for phrasing it as a penalty.

 

Sure. I too completely understand the perspective of the people who are affected by it. I feel for whoever can't participate as much as they'd like to.  Except that it's not a penalty.

 

Edited by thebruce0
  • Upvote 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

The penalty (if you consider it one) of having to travel so far, past all those caches you have already found, is self-imposed. If you hadn't blacked-out tour home area, you wouldn't have the issue.

 

(And, NO, it isn't a penalty.)  

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 

Oh my. The first assertion made was that people are being penalized. I can't tell people what they are feeling is wrong, nor do I disagree with the sentiment. I'm telling you that by definintion no one is being penalized. Find a better word to describe the action, not the feeling, because no matter how you try to describe it, no one is being explicitly penalized by Groundspeak!

 

Being "penalized" would be having HQ disable your ability to log finds for a period; disabling your forum post ability.  Heck, even having a false find log deleted by a CO or HQ isn't a penalty, it's a correction of a falsehood - but it might earn you a penalty if you demonstrate a habit of falsely logging finds.  Geocachers DO get penalized!  And no, this promotion does not penalize people just for being geocachers in less dense geocaching areas.

 

What about those people who live in remote areas with 5 geocaches within 100kms? Man, they MUST have done SOMETHING wrong to get such a penalty from GCHQ!

 

Absolutely, I believe "penalty" is absurd to describe what IS happening (not the way people feel) with this promotion.

Find another word.

 

 

 

Sure. I too completely understand the perspective of the people who are affected by it. I feel for whoever can't participate as much as they'd like to.  Except that it's not a penalty.

 

 

Sounds like you're also playing word games here.  As I already said, I get where you're coming from, I just disagree with how you're limiting the definition of the word "penalty" and I disagree that your definition is somehow the authoritative final objective definition.  I'd love to live in a world where the English language was as clear-cut and unambiguous as you're suggesting it is, but that just isn't the world that exists.  And typing things in bold doesn't change that.  I'm still gonna stick with the word as defined by OED, rather than the word as defined by posts on a GC forum.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, ZeppelinDT said:

I just disagree with how you're limiting the definition of the word "penalty"

 

We're limiting it to what it means.

 

 

6 minutes ago, ZeppelinDT said:

I'm still gonna stick with the word as defined by OED

 

Except that you're not using the right word.

 

youkeepusingthatword.jpg.803cbc63029f882262f54458be06d8c6.jpg

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 

We're limiting it to what it means.

 

 

 

Except that you're not using the right word.

 

youkeepusingthatword.jpg.803cbc63029f882262f54458be06d8c6.jpg

I don't have a dog in this fight, but it's interesting watching from the sidelines.  I'm not sure you're seeing that your arguements against ZepplinDT can be used against your position also.  You are using a definition of Penlty as a punishment imposed on a person or group - and claiming that is the only definition.  But by the definition ZepplinDT supplied a penlty can be a disadvantage imposed by the rules of the game - and the rules of the promo game is that a lot of caches need to be found.  Those that don't have a lot of caches around them (either because of finding them previously, or lack of hides around them) are at a disadvantage in playing the promo game (side-game or not).  So that definition of penlty could be applied.   So he (or she) is "limiting the use to what the word means."  And you keep using the word, but "I do not think it means what you think it means."

 

I do agree the emotional aspects of the word penlty may be a bit strong for this hobby, so maybe go back to the definition and use "disadvantage" insead?

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

It is quite unfortunate that not every person on the planet can participate equally in every single souvenir promotion (I'm not exaggerating - in an ideal world that would be possible, but the nature of geocaching does not make that possible).

Not to get too political or anything, but I don't think that would be an ideal world at all. Challenges such as the one put forth by this souvenir are pointless if everyone can achieve them. So it's not fair that someone has to travel further. So what? It wasn't "fair" that I didn't have time to go caching enough to get the the World Turtle last year. I just shrugged. If someone feels slighted, they should just think about someone in a wheelchair trying to meet these goals. Then maybe they'd count their blessings instead of complaining about being penalized.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 7/19/2019 at 1:08 PM, The Jester said:

I don't have a dog in this fight, but it's interesting watching from the sidelines.  I'm not sure you're seeing that your arguements against ZepplinDT can be used against your position also.  You are using a definition of Penlty as a punishment imposed on a person or group - and claiming that is the only definition.  But by the definition ZepplinDT supplied a penlty can be a disadvantage imposed by the rules of the game - and the rules of the promo game is that a lot of caches need to be found.  Those that don't have a lot of caches around them (either because of finding them previously, or lack of hides around them) are at a disadvantage in playing the promo game (side-game or not).  So that definition of penlty could be applied.   So he (or she) is "limiting the use to what the word means."  And you keep using the word, but "I do not think it means what you think it means."

 

I do agree the emotional aspects of the word penlty may be a bit strong for this hobby, so maybe go back to the definition and use "disadvantage" insead?

 

Your last sentence is exactly what I was going to reply. Disadvantage is a better word than penalty.

Definition quoted: "In various sports and games: a disadvantage imposed upon a competitor or team in accordance with the rules of a particular game." 

A penalty is above and beyond a mere disadvantage. It is "a disadvantage imposed upon" as in with intentionality to specific group of people, "in accordance with the rules".  As I said earlier, guaranteed Groundspeak did not think to themselves "Let's punish people who for whatever reason [lack of caches, finding too many, slow or sparse local community, etc] won't have enough geocaches to qualify for the souvenirs!"  Nor is there anything in the "rules" that state someone will receive a consequential penalty ("in accordance with") for performing an action against the rules.

 

At worst, perhaps the nature of the promo was an oversight. But that does not constitute an intentional penalty imposed upon a group of people.

Did they design the game knowing that not everyone would be able to complete it? I would be shocked if they didn't!

 

In many aspects of this hobby are people more disadvantaged than others. It's the nature of the hobby. I'll requote:

 

Being penalized:
* having HQ disable your ability to log finds for a period

* having your account locked for a period

* have your forum posting ability disabled

 

Not being penalized:

* having a false find log deleted

* living in an area with 5 findable geocaches within 100kms

 

By the use of the word as implied by ZeppelinDT, any geocacher who can't get a cache on an island because they don't have a boat is being penalized by the cache owner!  Sure, someone bitter could say the cache owner has something against people without boats, and is intentionally making it so if you don't have a boat you can't find the cache for that specific reason, but that's an emotionally driven use of the word that's not accurate. A cache owner has no ability to penalize another geocacher because they don't have authority over another cacher. If HQ responds to a situation where a geocacher did something wrong ("in accordance with the rules"), the situation may be corrected, and then maybe that geocacher could be penalized.

 

A straightforward disadvantage is not a "penalty."  A penalty is imposed explicitly for a reason.  If Groundspeak wanted to, say, 'teach people who have very few available finds nearby' a lesson, then perhaps the promo could be a penalty.  But there is no rule or restriction stopping people from completing the promo for having insufficient finds within in arbitrarily reasonable travel distance. There is merely an inherent variance in convenience and ability to complete it based on the pre-existing nature of the hobby.

 

Disadvantage, sure.

"Penalty," no.

 

 

What about those people who live in remote areas with 5 geocaches within 100kms? Man, they MUST have done SOMETHING wrong to get such a penalty from GCHQ!

 

ETA: Fixed attribution for use of the word

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, dprovan said:
3 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

It is quite unfortunate that not every person on the planet can participate equally in every single souvenir promotion (I'm not exaggerating - in an ideal world that would be possible, but the nature of geocaching does not make that possible).

Not to get too political or anything, but I don't think that would be an ideal world at all. Challenges such as the one put forth by this souvenir are pointless if everyone can achieve them. So it's not fair that someone has to travel further. So what? It wasn't "fair" that I didn't have time to go caching enough to get the the World Turtle last year. I just shrugged. If someone feels slighted, they should just think about someone in a wheelchair trying to meet these goals. Then maybe they'd count their blessings instead of complaining about being penalized.

 

Oh I completely agree. Note I said "participate" not "get all the things." ;)

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, BraillerCD said:

I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me. So I have to travel a far greater distance just to grab these caches. Geocaching has created a  souvenir series that  penalizes those of us who have caches a while. 

 

You could use that argument for any promotion:

"find 10 caches to qualify" -> "I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me, so I have to travel XX miles to find 10 caches"

"find a trad, a multi, a puzzle to qualify" -> "I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me, so I have to travel XX miles to find 3 cache types"

"find a cache every day -> "I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me, so I have to travel XX miles to find a cache every day"
 

I'd be interested in your ideas for a promotion, which involves going out and finding caches, which isn't going to "penalize" you.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, MartyBartfast said:

You could use that argument for any promotion:
...

I'd be interested in your ideas for a promotion, which involves going out and finding caches, which isn't going to "penalize" you. 

 

Yeah, I mean everything that HQ does is inconvenient for someone; it really seems like Groundspeak is in the business of "penalizing" people. :ph34r:

 

ETA: Here's another thought experiment - are basic/non-paying members being penalized by not being granted access to all the features that paying members enjoy?  Or are paying members receiving special access to what they've earned by paying for the extra features?  Oh it could feel like you're being penalized as a basic member, but only if you feel that you have a right to those additional features. Either basic access is the norm and PM gets a benefit, or full access is the norm and reduced access is a penalty for not paying. We all know that full access is not the norm.  Additionally, both basic members and paying members can be penalized if they break the user agreement (ie, "in accordance with the rules"), and to a degree deemed fair, a disadvantage from the norm "imposed" by HQ.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 

A penalty is above and beyond a mere disadvantage. It is "a disadvantage imposed upon" as in with intentionality to specific group of people, "in accordance with the rules".  As I said earlier, guaranteed Groundspeak did not think to themselves "Let's punish people who for whatever reason [lack of caches, finding too many, slow or sparse local community, etc] won't have enough geocaches to qualify for the souvenirs!"  Nor is there anything in the "rules" that state someone will receive a consequential penalty ("in accordance with") for performing an action against the rules.

 

At worst, perhaps the nature of the promo was an oversight. But that does not constitute an intentional penalty imposed upon a group of people.

Did they design the game knowing that not everyone would be able to complete it? I would be shocked if they didn't!

 

Fair enough on this point.  I think this is the strongest argument I've seen for your interpretation so far and I guess this is a pretty reasonable way to read it.

Share this post


Link to post

Actually, I just took a closer look at OED and I noticed another, much more applicable definition than the one I cited earlier.

 

One of OED's definitions for "penalty" includes:  "the disadvantage suffered as the result of an action or situation."

 

Seems pretty crystal clear that this one applies.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh heavens...

Each of those examples demonstrates "an action or situation" away from the norm, away from the standard which incurs a pentalty as a result.  No disadvantage is suffered as a result of anything in this promotion - ie, a "penalty".

The promotion itself is disadvantageous to some people for whom more work is required to complete it - that is not a penalty, a result - it IS the norm, and it's not a norm that was incurred as a result of anything.  So there is a natural disadvantage - but that is not a penalty that is incurred, it's merely a disadvantage!   I don't know why you're insisting on the use of penalty to describe this disadvantage, unless you're insisting on implying that Groundspeak is somehow intentionally punishing people unfairly.

We're insisting it's not a penalty because Groundspeak is not imposing any sort of restriction on anyone, let alone for a particular reason or in response to some action that may or may not be 'against the rules', and painting Groundspeak in that antagonistic light by using "penalty" which can't possibly be defended when used in such an incorrect way, is argumentative.

 

And once again, the use of penalty you're insisting on means Groundspeak is in the business of penalizing EVERYONE.  Because everyone has less advantage than someone else in this hobby!  Please, just let 'penalty' go. It's simply untrue.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, thebruce0 said:

Oh heavens...

Each of those examples demonstrates "an action or situation" away from the norm, away from the standard which incurs a pentalty as a result.  No disadvantage is suffered as a result of anything in this promotion - ie, a "penalty".

The promotion itself is disadvantageous to some people for whom more work is required to complete it - that is not a penalty, a result - it IS the norm, and it's not a norm that was incurred as a result of anything.  So there is a natural disadvantage - but that is not a penalty that is incurred, it's merely a disadvantage!   I don't know why you're insisting on the use of penalty to describe this disadvantage, unless you're insisting on implying that Groundspeak is somehow intentionally punishing people unfairly.

We're insisting it's not a penalty because Groundspeak is not imposing any sort of restriction on anyone, let alone for a particular reason or in response to some action that may or may not be 'against the rules', and painting Groundspeak in that antagonistic light by using "penalty" which can't possibly be defended when used in such an incorrect way, is argumentative.

 

And once again, the use of penalty you're insisting on means Groundspeak is in the business of penalizing EVERYONE.  Because everyone has less advantage than someone else in this hobby!  Please, just let 'penalty' go. It's simply untrue.

 

Where does the OED definition say that the situation must be "away from the norm"?  It literally just says "the disadvantage suffered as the result of ... a situation".  I am absolutely not insisting on Groundspeak being in the business of penalizing everyone.  The latest definition I cited is explicitly passive and situational.  It does not require Groundspeak to be actively "penalizing" anybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

"There aren't enough caches for me to complete the promo because I have to drive <arbitrary distance> to find one! Groundspeak is penalizing me!"

 

2 hours ago, MartyBartfast said:

"find 10 caches to qualify" -> "I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me, so I have to travel XX miles to find 10 caches"

"find a trad, a multi, a puzzle to qualify" -> "I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me, so I have to travel XX miles to find 3 cache types"

"find a cache every day -> "I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me, so I have to travel XX miles to find a cache every day"

 

"...Groundspeak is penalizing me!"

 

"With them marriage cannot be omitted without very high penalties inflicted by that Nemesis interwoven with the law of Nature"
- Marriage (and its woes) is an action that's not the norm, causing a counter result

 

"When a man says he promises any thing, he subjects himself to the penalty of never being trusted again in case of failure"
- Promising something (and not following through) is an action that's not the norm, causing a counter result

 

"You in doing it have incurred the penalties you well deserve to suffer"
- The action (implied negative) done is not the norm, causing a counter result

 

"It was the heavy price which he had to pay for his conquests: the penalty, perhaps we may add, of suspicions too lightly indulged"
- The conquests (with a heavy price) are actions that are not the norm, causing a counter result

 

"It is the penalty of greatness that its form should outlive its substance"
- Greatness (and its increased visibility over the status quo) is not the norm, causing a counter result

 

"Increases in strength or stiffness have always brought a weight penalty"
- Increased strength or stiffness (and its lesser mobility) is not the norm, causing a counter result

 

"She had breached some unwritten rule of her small world, had got above herself, and had paid the penalty"
- Breaching an unwritten rule (and getting above herself) is not the norm, causing a counter result


--> Abiding somewhere where there are fewer than an arbitrarily reasonable number of findable geocaches within an arbitrarily reasonable travel distance IS the norm. Clues were distributed based on an algorithm applied evenly worldwide.  If you call someone who's therefore at a disadvantage as being explicitly penalized, by applying arbitrary numbers for cache quantity and acceptable distance, then EVERYONE can say they're being penalized!  The definition you are insisting on can't be reasonably defended without permitting the absurd.

 

With that I'm done defending the definition, according to the OED which you insist on, and that the use of "penalty" as unnecessarily antagonistic towards Groundspeak. The thread is getting off track.

 

No one has received a penalty.

No one is being penalized by Groundspeak.

And that's all I've got to say about that.

*and there was much rejoicing*

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

"With them marriage cannot be omitted without very high penalties inflicted by that Nemesis interwoven with the law of Nature"
- Marriage (and its woes) is an action that's not the norm, causing a counter result

 

Wait, what?  Marriage is not the norm, but a Geocaching souvenir promotion IS the norm?  This seems like you're using very a selective and convenient interpretation of how you define "norm".  What standard are you using to decide what does and doesn't count as "the norm"?

Share this post


Link to post

Never mind the definitions. Is GS to blame for your disadvantage? No, it's just a result of your situation. Call that a penalty if you want, but it doesn't follow that GS penalized you. They aren't to blame, and there's no good reason to think they could have avoided your disadvantage regardless of whether you and thebruce0 can agree to call that disadvantage a penalty.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

 

By the use of the word as implied by ODragon, any geocacher who can't get a cache on an island because they don't have a boat is being penalized by the cache owner!  

 

I feel like I'm being pulled into a conversation that I havent participated in...  I believe you mean someone else.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, ZeppelinDT said:

 

Idunno, according to OED one of the definitions of "penalty" is:

 

"In various sports and games: a disadvantage imposed upon a competitor or team in accordance with the rules of a particular game."

 

Sounds like a penalty to me.

Not relevant as such penalties are RULE infractions. No one is breaking any rules if they can't or don't participate in our activity.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, K13 said:

If you hadn't blacked-out tour home area, you wouldn't have the issue.

 

Really? There are many parts of the world where even someone just starting would have to do an enormous amount of travelling to make much headway in this promotion, particularly the way it's structured where you can't plan ahead across levels. This promotion not only requires a region with a fair number of caches, it also needs them to be clumped together rather than spread far and wide (i.e. big cities or power trails).

 

All the preceding promotions since the beginning of 2018 (Planetary Pursuit, Hidden Creatures, You Might be a Geocacher If... and Cache Carnival) have required finding lots of caches to complete them, so anyone who was keen to participate in those is probably going to have gone a fair way towards wiping the board in their local area before they even start on this one. So we have two things, promotions that now require finding a lot more caches than they used to (like the Road Trip in 2015 or Mission GC in 2016 for example) and what used to be an annual thing is now happening a lot more often - there have been six in the last two years. It seems about the only way to stay ahead in this game is to get together with the local community to create lots of power trails.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:
10 hours ago, K13 said:

If you hadn't blacked-out tour home area, you wouldn't have the issue.

 

Really? There are many parts of the world where even someone just starting would have to do an enormous amount of travelling to make much headway in this promotion, particularly the way it's structured where you can't plan ahead across levels. This promotion not only requires a region with a fair number of caches, it also needs them to be clumped together rather than spread far and wide (i.e. big cities or power trails).

 

To add some real-world numbers to this, if I was just starting afresh here, in the default 16km radius of my home, excluding my own caches (which I obviously can't find), there are 292 enabled caches. But this promotion is about finding lots of caches quickly so we should probably eliminate the higher D/T ones (say D or T of 3 or above), leaving 162. Again because of the need for speed, it'd also be reasonable to eliminate multis and puzzles because of the time these take per cache and just focus on traditionals, leaving 132. Of these, there are 8 detectives, 11 footprints, 9 shadows and 14 fingerprints. Okay, so probably reasonably achievable for someone who hasn't done any caching at all in the region, but for anyone who's been playing the game here for a year or more, or attempted any of the other recent promotions, they're likely to have already found the majority of those.

 

By contrast, I then looked at a 16km radius around where I grew up in western Sydney's suburban sprawl. There I get 1345 enabled caches, 1027 with D/T < 3, 874 of which are traditionals, with 39 detectives, 84 footprints, 75 shadows and 65 fingerprints amongst them. It's almost an order of magnitude easier for someone living there, and the same goes for the other four numbers-chase promotions leading up to this one.

 

I don't think my region is particularly poorly endowed with caches, in fact Project GC shows it ranked third in New South Wales by local government areas. Places like Tamworth, where I lived in the late 80s and early 90s, have less than half the number of caches compared to here. I don't know what it's like in other countries, but about a third of Australia's population lives outside the major metropolitan areas so it's not as if us non-city folk are some tiny minority that ought to be just cast aside in every promotion.

 

Anyway, I've already given up on this one so I no longer have a dog in this fight, but I feel for everyone else out there who might have been drawn in by the promotion's promos only to find when they start to get into it, the travel requirements become simply prohibitive.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

A penalty is imposed explicitly for a reason. 

 

This is the crux of the matter.  This is a too narrow a view of a penalty.  You can suffer a penalty without it being explicitly imposed on you.  A 5 foot tall person suffers a penalty when playing basketball because the rules fix the basket height.  It was not explicitly imposed on him.

 

GS is not explicitly imposing a penalty on people in cache poor regions, but because of the rules of the promotion, they will suffer a penalty to complete it.  They set it as a challenge for players to accomplish, but some will suffer a penalty in play due to the number of caches that are needed to be found.

 

I agree that emotionally it's not the best word to use, but I'm arguing against your statement that it's an invalid word to use.  I'm sure you won't agree but I needed to make the point.  'Nough said.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, The Jester said:

A 5 foot tall person suffers a penalty when playing basketball because the rules fix the basket height.  It was not explicitly imposed on him.

A penalty? No. A short person might suffer a disadvantage when playing basketball. But calling that a penalty is absurd.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, niraD said:

A penalty? No. A short person might suffer a disadvantage when playing basketball. But calling that a penalty is absurd.


Absurd?  As mentioned before:

 

On ‎7‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 7:36 AM, ZeppelinDT said:

according to OED one of the definitions of "penalty" is:

 

"In various sports and games: a disadvantage imposed upon a competitor or team in accordance with the rules of a particular game."

 

The disadvantage is a penalty...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/18/2019 at 10:38 PM, BraillerCD said:

This may be sour grapes, but because I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me. So I have to travel a far greater distance just to grab these caches. Geocaching has created a  souvenir series that  penalizes those of us who have caches a while. 

 

And that's why you're seeing my name more often on your caches.  Fifteen miles by GPSr/Thirty miles by road.  I've been caching fifteen years!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I split off all the above posts about the concept of "penalizing" geocachers from the main "Mystery at the Museum" thread.  Definitional debates can continue here.  Questions and feedback about the promotion can occur in the main thread.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks.

Unfortunately it seems the last entire comment I made didn't make it to either thread and I think there was content for the promo subject, but I forget now... and it's not important. Thanks for forcing the other one back on track.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, The Jester said:
9 hours ago, niraD said:

A penalty? No. A short person might suffer a disadvantage when playing basketball. But calling that a penalty is absurd.


Absurd?  As mentioned before:

 

On 7/19/2019 at 7:36 AM, ZeppelinDT said:

according to OED one of the definitions of "penalty" is:

 

"In various sports and games: a disadvantage imposed upon a competitor or team in accordance with the rules of a particular game."

 

The disadvantage is a penalty...

 

youkeepusingthatword.jpg.803cbc63029f882262f54458be06d8c6.jpg

 

In basketball, if you travel and the other team gets possession of the ball, that is a penalty.

In basketball, if you foul an opponent and the opponent gets a free throw, that is a penalty.

In basketball, if you play poorly (whether because you're short or because you lack skill or because of anything else), then you are at a disadvantage. That is definitely NOT a penalty.

Edited by niraD
  • Upvote 2
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 10:38 PM, BraillerCD said:

This may be sour grapes, but because I’ve cached for 9 years I have few caches I haven’t found near me. So I have to travel a far greater distance just to grab these caches. Geocaching has created a  souvenir series that  penalizes those of us who have caches a while. 

 

It doesn't have anything to do with "caching a while".     :)

That incorrectly says that all cachers are numbers finders, and should have their immediate areas cleared out.     

Some folks feel they "gotta get 'em all", so should realize they need to  factor in travel if they're going to participate in promotions too. 

I don't think we know anyone  that's cached a while,  that doesn't have to travel further than when they started, so I'm a little curious what your point is

 

Since the other 2/3rds hasn't been caching, I'm now free to go after caches I like to do.  Very few are near me...

As the finned one above mentioned, actual driving now is forty miles n up just to be in the woods (community parks don't count  :-).

Here, we save those low D/T  "near me" caches for promotions that interest us.  ;)

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yep "caching a while" may be a disadvantage when locally available caches are balanced against the ones already found. Does that mean one should not go find them in case one is penalised buy a future promotion. Give us a break.

A few days ago, while in pursuit of required numbers I fell short due to my GSAK radius set at 100km which, as luck would have it, my phone service also dropped out, and put about 100 or more caches out of reach. I certainly did not feel penalised in any way at having to travel such a distance. Disadvantaged? Perhaps - but disappointed would be more appropriate. In the next couple of days I will be doing that trip again to get the rest (34/35). These will be caches I would be going after anyway, even if it were not for the MATM. It's only costing me my time and a few dollars worth of fuel and costing way less than a round of golf at any of the local clubs.

Another point. There are plenty of mystery caches (about a 100 or so) within that 100km radius I have yet to find but as I suck at solving puzzles they remain  not found. Should I feel penalised by because I cannot solve them? Hardly, but it does put me at a disadvantage.

Share this post


Link to post
44 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

Here, we save those low D/T  "near me" caches for promotions that interest us.  ;)

 

Here, there are only 15 low D/T caches (D and T less than or equal to 2) in my local area (the Woy Woy peninsula and surrounds, covering about 80 square kilometres), 2 of them mine. The only one I haven't found is a front yard cache where I suspect, reading between the lines of recent logs, the CO doesn't live there anymore, so promotion or not, I have no great desire to do that one.

 

image.png.1ac8ac2c2ba38fd7823870dd33fb6763.png

 

A rank beginner would clear this area out in one weekend.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

A rank beginner would clear this area out in one weekend.

 

Sure, but a rank beginner may have no idea about the promotion. Have you tried to delete old logs and relog them again?

Edited by arisoft

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/19/2019 at 11:44 AM, K13 said:

The penalty (if you consider it one) of having to travel so far, past all those caches you have already found, is self-imposed. If you hadn't blacked-out tour home area, you wouldn't have the issue.

 

(And, NO, it isn't a penalty.)  

I just traveled 3300 miles (each way).  The area I was in had fewer caches than I have available at home.  Traveling doesn't necessarily make the promotion easier, though many pretty much *have* to travel to play.    For someone living in any area that is very cache sparse, I would't consider finding all of the caches within a reasonable driving distance to be blacking out the area.  They're just trying to play the game, and watch others play promotions that were designed in a way, where players in a cache sparse area are at a disadvantage.  

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/19/2019 at 3:10 PM, colleda said:

I've had to learn the ins and outs of caching with my phone for this

Why's that? I just completed this (most caches found today and yesterday) and I used my GPS.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Why's that? I just completed this (most caches found today and yesterday) and I used my GPS.

So did I. Additionally I marked the caches that hold Gems with an attribute poi for an easy identification on the Garmin's map.

post-6-1563641437.png

 

Hans

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

×
×
  • Create New...