Jump to content

The curious case of the 20 Finds... just so you can Hide your own caches


Recommended Posts

Living in a huge country with not that many caches, means that I can have them all in Watchlist. Considering that, is really easy to be alerted by sudden Found It logs all over Brazil... especially here in the Amazon basin, where it is almost impossible to travel between state capitals... in a single day. Sometimes even in different south American countries and in other continents.

When some of those caches are mine, is even easier to verify that it is nothing but fake Founds.

Usually I send a respectful message to these geocachers, stating my "admiration" to such feats.

In the good old days, most of the times, they blamed on their little children getting hold of their smartphones, and simply apologize.

 

Nevertheless, lately arised a new reason. They heard somehow and somewhere that it is needed to Found at least 20 caches to be able to Hide the first one.

 

Suddenly they answer my messages like this:

"Look I’m just a kid that wants to hide one so let me be."

"Ok I just wanted to hide a cache but I’m still trying to find the location that I’m going to put it so I just wanted to hide one so I “found” 20 caches."

"I do not care." :)

 

I always reply saying that they don't need to find any specific amount of caches, but even if they feel that they do, at least don't cheat by claiming false Founds.

The immediate consequence of this in a country with many faraway caches waiting (real) FTFs, is the idea that is useless to look for them, as soon another of these fake logs arrive.

I think that something should be done to address this false claims. But what?

 

I'm concerned with this new "trend" that a newbie needs to find at least 20 caches, forcing them to cheat... not the old story of simply fake Found It logs.

Edited by RuideAlmeida
  • Surprised 5
Link to comment

It's a long shot but how about instigating a "class action" among the hiders in your part of the world - Brazil? A kind of union that can take on the fake loggers by deleting logs, making all hides PMO, mass disabling?

In reality, it is a difficult situation for which I don't see any realistic counteraction to prevent such behaviour apart from what you have already done. Good luck.

Edited by colleda
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

Proof of signing  - This can take multiple forms

 

- Picture of your log

- Geo fencing (adventure labs) do this. 

- Some kind of code to be entered to claim a find, found on the cache or nearby sign (adventure labs do this as well)

- I'm sure others exist

 

All have their pros and cons do you see trend?

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, MNTA said:

Proof of signing  - This can take multiple forms

 

- Picture of your log

- Geo fencing (adventure labs) do this. 

- Some kind of code to be entered to claim a find, found on the cache or nearby sign (adventure labs do this as well)

- I'm sure others exist

 

All have their pros and cons do you see trend?

 

I don't think there's a reasonable technological solution to this. Geo-fencing would require the use of a phone app for caching, which in turn requires mobile data converage which is difficult enough here in Australia so I presume in somewhere like Brazil it'd be even more patchy or non-existent in a lot of the country. What about those of us who cache with dedicated GPSrs, or even those who cache with paper maps and a compass? Also codes can be shared and pictures can be easily faked. No matter what you do, if someone really wants to cheat they'll find a way of doing it, you only have to look at the widespread use of location-spoofing to fake-log ALs - I've seen more evidence of that on my three ALs than on any of my phyiscal caches.

 

At its core it's an attitude problem and I think a lot of that stems from the push to make caching a social media game. Maybe logging in with a social media account is good for HQ's bottom line, but I don't think it's good for fostering a conscientious attitude to the game and its underlying tenet of "find the cache, sign the log and then log online." There seems to be too much emphasis on accumulating smileys as the end goal. It's a bit like what gambling's done to sport.

  • Upvote 5
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment

The problem with fake finds on remote caches exists not only in Brazil. Browse the cache map, and pick a random rural cache in an "exotic" part of the planet, where geocaching is essentially non-existing (e.g. large parts of Africa). If the cache has finds, then chances are good that most of them are almost certainly fakes.

I don't think there is a technological solution to this (geofencing, whatever ...). IMHO the most important part in the equation are the cache owners. If someone place a cache in a remote place, they should at least care that the listing doesn't accumulate finds, which are most likely fakes. You don't need to check the physical logbook - just ask a polite question (as the OP has said), and if there is no response (or the fake log is outright admitted), delete the log.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

The problem with fake finds on remote caches exists not only in Brazil. Browse the cache map, and pick a random rural cache in an "exotic" part of the planet, where geocaching is essentially non-existing (e.g. large parts of Africa). If the cache has finds, then chances are good that most of them are almost certainly fakes.

I don't think there is a technological solution to this (geofencing, whatever ...). IMHO the most important part in the equation are the cache owners. If someone place a cache in a remote place, they should at least care that the listing doesn't accumulate finds, which are most likely fakes. You don't need to check the physical logbook - just ask a polite question (as the OP has said), and if there is no response (or the fake log is outright admitted), delete the log.

 

 

I'm concerned with this new "trend" that a newbie needs to find at least 20 caches, forcing them to cheat... not the old story of simply fake Found It logs.

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
15 hours ago, RuideAlmeida said:

The immediate consequence of this in a country with many faraway caches waiting (real) FTFs, is the idea that is useless to look for them, as soon another of these fake logs arrive.

I think that something should be done to address this false claims. But what?

 

Odd that this is a recent thing where you are, we've realized this hobby became a game since phone apps ...     

Games need "points", and he with the most points wins.    :)

By your terrain, looking to check could be a real pain-in-the-can.  I can simply drive by and spot mine (with binoculars).

Some you can tell in wording they never found it, others ...not so much, so you can't just zap everyone.

If me, I'd probably bulk-delete with no explanation (they know they didn't find it...) when it's time for maintenance.

Odds are most of those deleted aren't even in the hobby anymore by then...

I have two five-Terrain caches I'd like to do maintenance on when I'm capable (soon I hope...), and already know that a few are fakers that'll be deleted at that time.  Luckily both are checked by others to still be there in good shape....

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Odd that this is a recent thing where you are, we've realized this hobby became a game since phone apps ...     

Games need "points", and he with the most points wins.    :)

By your terrain, looking to check could be a real pain-in-the-can.  I can simply drive by and spot mine (with binoculars).

Some you can tell in wording they never found it, others ...not so much, so you can't just zap everyone.

If me, I'd probably bulk-delete with no explanation (they know they didn't find it...) when it's time for maintenance.

Odds are most of those deleted aren't even in the hobby anymore by then...

I have two five-Terrain caches I'd like to do maintenance on when I'm capable (soon I hope...), and already know that a few are fakers that'll be deleted at that time.  Luckily both are checked by others to still be there in good shape....

 

 

I'm concerned with this new "trend" that a newbie needs to find at least 20 caches, forcing them to cheat... not the old story of simply fake Found It logs.

Sorry if I was not clear on the matter.

Edited by RuideAlmeida
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
Just now, RuideAlmeida said:

I'm concerned with this new "trend" that a newbie needs to find at least 20 caches, forcing them to cheat... not the old story of simply fake Found It logs.

 

Could it be in interpretation?   Something in wording that makes folks think that way?

"We encourage you to find at least 20 geocaches before hiding one" might be off a bit to sound like it's a requirement?

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, RuideAlmeida said:

I'm concerned with this new "trend" that a newbie needs to find at least 20 caches, forcing them to cheat... not the old story of simply fake Found It logs.

Oops ... I'm sorry that I misunderstood your posting.

 

Anyway, regarding this "trend": If I were you, I'd try to find out where it comes from, and actively advocate in the Brazilian community, that it is not true that you need a minimum amount of finds to place a cache. Here (in Germany), this "trend" is non-existing - newbies quite often place caches after less than 5 finds (with mixed results ;) ).

Link to comment
2 hours ago, baer2006 said:

... actively advocate in the Brazilian community, that it is not true that you need a minimum amount of finds to place a cache.

 

Funny enough, none of them are locals... all "gringos" like they call here all foreigners (I'm also one). :)

 

PS: Some german...

 

Edited by RuideAlmeida
  • Surprised 4
Link to comment
2 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

Odd that this is a recent thing where you are, we've realized this hobby became a game since phone apps ...   

 

There's always so much blaming in this forum on app users for bad parts of the game.  As if one find didn't increase your find count by one before the app.  :laughing:

 

Gamification - the application of typical elements of game playing (e.g. point scoring, competition with others, rules of play) to other areas of activity, typically as an online marketing technique to encourage engagement with a product or service.

 

Nothing changed with the introduction of apps except it made geocaching less expensive to enter and more accessible to lots of people who didn't have / couldn't afford / didn't want to purchase a GPS receiver or who didn't know about the game.

 

Edited by GeoElmo6000
  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
55 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

Nothing changed with the introduction of apps except it made geocaching less expensive to enter and more accessible to lots of people who didn't have / couldn't afford / didn't want to purchase a GPS receiver or who didn't know about the game.

Veering OT, but...

Odd, though many played the FTF side-game of this hobby, and some had a "numbers" fascination, we didn't really notice it getting to be the norm until around '14-'15. 

Guess it was just coincidental...

:laughing:

  • Funny 1
Link to comment
22 hours ago, RuideAlmeida said:

Living in a huge country with not that many caches, means that I can have them all in Watchlist. Considering that, is really easy to be alerted by sudden Found It logs all over Brazil... especially here in the Amazon basin, where it is almost impossible to travel between state capitals... in a single day. Sometimes even in different south American countries and in other continents.

When some of those caches are mine, is even easier to verify that it is nothing but fake Founds.

Usually I send a respectful message to these geocachers, stating my "admiration" to such feats.

In the good old days, most of the times, they blamed on their little children getting hold of their smartphones, and simply apologize.

 

Nevertheless, lately arised a new reason. They heard somehow and somewhere that it is needed to Found at least 20 caches to be able to Hide the first one.

 

Suddenly they answer my messages like this:

"Look I’m just a kid that wants to hide one so let me be."

"Ok I just wanted to hide a cache but I’m still trying to find the location that I’m going to put it so I just wanted to hide one so I “found” 20 caches."

"I do not care." :)

 

I always reply saying that they don't need to find any specific amount of caches, but even if they feel that they do, at least don't cheat by claiming false Founds.

The immediate consequence of this in a country with many faraway caches waiting (real) FTFs, is the idea that is useless to look for them, as soon another of these fake logs arrive.

I think that something should be done to address this false claims. But what?

 

I'm concerned with this new "trend" that a newbie needs to find at least 20 caches, forcing them to cheat... not the old story of simply fake Found It logs.

Will they start to care when there are fake found it logs on their caches, from other newbies who need to cheat in order to hide a cache? 😁

  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
18 hours ago, captnemo said:

How about in the listing, include something like "If you wish to validate a FTF,  take a picture of the log with your signature and the blanks pages and forward to the Cache owner".

 

I don't think this would be ALR.

 

Well, in order for that to matter, there would have to be acknowledgement of 'FTF' status, which there isn't.

If I want to claim FTF on a cache, I can. Doesn't matter if somebody else found it first.

If I want to claim FTF because I wrote my name above the person who found it before me, I can, and no one can tell me I'm wrong. If the CO says "No", I can merely thumb my nose at them and go on claiming FTF.

 

Anything else would involve indicating FTF somewhere in the software, and to do that, Groundspeak would have to institutionalize that side game, and there's no appetite for that.

 

So, I agree that your suggestion would not rise to the level of ALR, but what would it matter? Just to get the CO to say "OK; it's YOU!"?

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
Link to comment
22 hours ago, captnemo said:

How about in the listing, include something like "If you wish to validate a FTF,  take a picture of the log with your signature and the blanks pages and forward to the Cache owner".

 

As a CO, I don't want to be the adjudicator in FTF disputes. I'd rather these be resolved between the cachers themselves.

 

Duel.jpg.d26548c11e7445b7479675deab781f61.jpg

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 7
  • Love 1
Link to comment
On 6/6/2022 at 2:46 PM, fuzziebear3 said:

I also got a log recently that said something like 'this is my 20th find, now I can hide one'.  Apparently that idea is getting pushed out somewhere.

 

 

:) yes, yes it is:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/guidelines

 

We encourage you to find at least 20 geocaches before hiding one. The more variety of geocaches you find, the better you will understand how to create an enjoyable experience for other geocachers. Find additional guidance about hiding caches in our Help Center.

 

(looking to hide one myself I read the above)

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
20 hours ago, SoloScout said:

:) yes, yes it is:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/guidelines

 

We encourage you to find at least 20 geocaches before hiding one. The more variety of geocaches you find, the better you will understand how to create an enjoyable experience for other geocachers. Find additional guidance about hiding caches in our Help Center.

 

(looking to hide one myself I read the above)

 

There's a big difference though between "encourage" and "require". We're encouraged to eat more fruit and vegetables but it's not a requirement. I can't help wondering, though, if the problem in Brazil might simply be a translation issue.

 

That said, I did wait until I'd found 20 caches before I hid my first one, which took me two months from when I joined, and while those 20 were all traditionals, there was a good spread of D/T ratings, sizes and container types amongst them. My cache (GC4CAXV) was a 1.5/1.5 traditional and consisted of a 250ml Sistema hidden in a bushland reserve near home. It didn't get any FPs but it had 53 finds before I archived it a couple of years later when a tree fell right on top of its hiding place.

 

It was another 5 months and 51 finds (including 3 multis, 3 mysteries and an EarthCache) before I hid my second, that one a multi (GC4QX50). It wasn't anything spectacular, having two virtual waypoints with numbers to read off signs to fill in the missing digits in the coordinates, but it got 41 finds and 8 FPs before being washed away in a severe storm in 2016. It certainly did a lot better than my latest multi (GC9M6X5), which has just 3 finds and 2 FPs after five months, so finding lots of caches doesn't seem to have helped me make better hides. Probably the opposite, because I'm now a lot more adventurous in my bushland hides whereas the community here seems to just want quick and easy 1.5/1.5 traditionals.

  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
20 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

I can't help wondering, though, if the problem in Brazil might simply be a translation issue.

 

Like already stated... they are not locals. Americans (north), europeans, you choose it, but not brazilian (at least those with 20 in a row). And usualy with a mix of countries in several continents too... even Ukraine.

Edited by RuideAlmeida
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...