Jump to content

Virtual requirements


bartrod

Recommended Posts

I am the owner of a virtual cache that requires a photo at a designated set of coordinates to be posted in the log  as well as the answer to an observation at a nearby site be sent to me as a message/email. A recent visitor to the virtual site claims to have posted the photo and sent the answer. The photo never posted in the log and I never received the answer to the observation. I've been in discussion with him via the message system and I have no doubt he was there. Without the requirements having been received though, should I delete his find or allow it to stand? I'm also concerned as to what happened to the photo and answer...are they floating out there in cyberspace? Has this issue arisen before? 

Link to comment

Whenever we took and left a photo, we checked to be sure it came out okay (that sizing thing...).   :)

If it didn't, we'd try again.  I feel "letting this one slide" sets a precedent, but this isn't court.

If you "have no doubt" they were there, let it go, but realize the next person that comes along similar will use that one for reference.  I would...

IIRC, there was an issue with photos using the app in April or May.  They should have been fixed by now...

We always used email rather than the "message system" unless the CO says otherwise on their profile.   We never had anyone having discussions with us, so figure they went through.

Edited by cerberus1
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, bartrod said:

The photo never posted in the log and I never received the answer to the observation. I've been in discussion with him via the message system and I have no doubt he was there.

You are convinced he was there - did he answer your question?  Only you  ever see the answer as they are not posted in the log, and the purpose, in most cases, is verification of being at the location...you've got that.  No one needs to know he didn't specifically answer your question, only you and the cacher.

 

As far as the photo, can he just edit the log to add the photo?  I often add photos after the log has already posted....

  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
13 hours ago, bartrod said:

He didn''t remember the answer...and he doesn't have the photo so he can't edit the log. An unusual set of circumstances for a veteran cacher. 

Unusual, agreed, but if this is just a one off for this guy, I'd let it go.  I'm not one to nit pick other folks' logs when photos are required if the photos aren't there - and I'll post the required photo regardless.  If you are convinced the cacher was there, let it go, and let the log stand.

Link to comment
On 7/5/2022 at 8:53 PM, bartrod said:

He didn''t remember the answer...and he doesn't have the photo so he can't edit the log. An unusual set of circumstances for a veteran cacher. 

 

Possibly they visited the site in the past, and are trying to negotiate a smiley? There are several virtual rewards, recently published, that I could almost certainly get away with logging because I have old vacation photos that happen to meet the requirements...

Edited by Hügh
  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment

s*** happens. I had a virtual log deleted last night, presumably because the log doesn't have a photo. I know I took a photo (not a nice one, but it's a photo) and likely uploaded it. Actually, not the first time one of my logs didn't have the photo that I'm sure I uploaded! As I tend to delete those kind of photos from my phone I can't upload my log again. Oh well, that's one virtual find less.

Edited by terratin
  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
5 hours ago, terratin said:

s*** happens. I had a virtual log deleted last night, presumably because the log doesn't have a photo. I know I took a photo (not a nice one, but it's a photo) and likely uploaded it. Actually, not the first time one of my logs didn't have the photo that I'm sure I uploaded! As I tend to delete those kind of photos from my phone I can't upload my log again. Oh well, that's one virtual find less.

I would be happy to be a character witness if you decide to appeal terratin.

 

 

(Not that the word of a rogue like me would carry much weight)

  • Funny 2
Link to comment
On 7/9/2022 at 6:38 PM, Michaelcycle said:

I would be happy to be a character witness if you decide to appeal terratin.

 

 

(Not that the word of a rogue like me would carry much weight)

 LOL! No need. I don't need an additional virtual to be honest. I mean, if I hiked for a few hours to log a virtual at the end of the world: fine. But an inner city, take a photo of whatever virtual is nothing special for me.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
7 hours ago, terratin said:

 LOL! No need. I don't need an additional virtual to be honest. I mean, if I hiked for a few hours to log a virtual at the end of the world: fine. But an inner city, take a photo of whatever virtual is nothing special for me.

That's where I think virtual caches are being wasted. Allowing them to be published in places already clogged full of caches. They should be reserved for places with few caches and where physical caches are unlikely to be placed, as no cacher lives there to maintain them. Would be nice for geocachers visiting those place to then have at least virtual caches (which don't require physical maintenance) to log. I placed my virtual cache in a remote place with only one other cache. The next closest (2 caches) are 70 kms away. Another road direction, 115 kms, another road direction 382 kms. So caches are far apart there.

Still waiting for FTF on it, but it will come. The roads in the area are covered in grey nomads and their caravans at present, and there are geocachers among them.

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

That's where I think virtual caches are being wasted. Allowing them to be published in places already clogged full of caches. They should be reserved for places with few caches and where physical caches are unlikely to be placed, as no cacher lives there to maintain them. Would be nice for geocachers visiting those place to then have at least virtual caches (which don't require physical maintenance) to log. I placed my virtual cache in a remote place with only one other cache. The next closest (2 caches) are 70 kms away. Another road direction, 115 kms, another road direction 382 kms. So caches are far apart there.

Still waiting for FTF on it, but it will come. The roads in the area are covered in grey nomads and their caravans at present, and there are geocachers among them.

 

I'm very happy with my Virtual.  The spot in Weehawken, NJ, where 60,000 people were boat-lifted across the Hudson River on 9/11.

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment

I'm happy with my virtual in Bend Oregon at the last Blockbuster video store on earth. Some people choose not to post a picture on the log and some post the picture on the message to me.  If a photo is not taken or is too blurry to be identified I ask that they tell me what pizza shop is next door and what gas station is on the corner. Both answers can be found on the map if they really want to cheat but why would they?  17 favorites on less than 80 finds.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
41 minutes ago, tomfuller & Quill said:

If a photo is not taken or is too blurry to be identified I ask that they tell me what pizza shop is next door and what gas station is on the corner. Both answers can be found on the map if they really want to cheat but why would they?

 

I doubt I'd remember what shops were on the corner in any of the places of cached, especially days or even weeks after I was there. Even on the three or four occasions when I've been caching around Kurri Kurri and have bought some fish and chips lunch there, I couldn't tell you what the shop was called or even the name of the street it's on, it's not the sort of thing I notice.

 

Sometimes I'm glad I missed out on all the virtual rewards as I wouldn't relish having to deal with find logs that haven't fulfilled even the most basic of logging tasks. Aside from the out-and-out cheats, there are also an increasing number of short-term cachers who just see it as another phone game to try and have no interest in things like logging requirements.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

That's where I think virtual caches are being wasted. Allowing them to be published in places already clogged full of caches. They should be reserved for places with few caches and where physical caches are unlikely to be placed, as no cacher lives there to maintain them. Would be nice for geocachers visiting those place to then have at least virtual caches (which don't require physical maintenance) to log. I placed my virtual cache in a remote place with only one other cache. The next closest (2 caches) are 70 kms away. Another road direction, 115 kms, another road direction 382 kms. So caches are far apart there.

Still waiting for FTF on it, but it will come. The roads in the area are covered in grey nomads and their caravans at present, and there are geocachers among them.

 

The spot I had in mind for a virtual, had I been successful in the draw, is a spectacular yet relatively remote location in Brisbane Water National Park. I'd previously tried to get permission for a physical cache there but it was knocked back, and it's not really suitable for an AL as the app's map doesn't show any of the walking tracks in the park, so I thought it'd be good for a virtual. On the other hand, it would have had a terrain-4 rating so one could argue that it would only appeal to a small niche group of cachers who'd want to spend half a day doing what is a pretty rugged hike and around here you can count those on the fingers of one hand. If one measures a virtual's worth to the community by the number of smileys it generates and FPs it gets, it would rank pretty low I'm sure.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
12 hours ago, Harry Dolphin said:

 

I'm very happy with my Virtual.  The spot in Weehawken, NJ, where 60,000 people were boat-lifted across the Hudson River on 9/11.

If you live there you could have placed a physical cache (or if you don't live there, someone else could have) and told the story with that. The remote places I refer to are unlikely to be able to have physical caches (or new ones) as no cacher lives close enough. Using the virtual for that, as I did, rather than shove in another cache among thousands where I live, presents an opportunity to spread geocaching further.

Link to comment
36 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:
13 hours ago, Harry Dolphin said:

 

I'm very happy with my Virtual.  The spot in Weehawken, NJ, where 60,000 people were boat-lifted across the Hudson River on 9/11.

If you live there you could have placed a physical cache (or if you don't live there, someone else could have) and told the story with that. The remote places I refer to are unlikely to be able to have physical caches (or new ones) as no cacher lives close enough. Using the virtual for that, as I did, rather than shove in another cache among thousands where I live, presents an opportunity to spread geocaching further.

 

For what it's worth, I'd like to see as much variety as possible with virtual placements. It's great that Harry placed his in a spot that's important to him and his community, and it's great that you placed yours in an outback spot important to you where the long distance travellers can enjoy it. We all have our own particular interests in the game and if we're able to place a once-in-a-lifetime virtual that embodies that love, so much the better. 1/1 urban virtuals that are accessible to all are just as important in enriching the game as the more challenging or remote ones. I've enjoyed all the Virtual Reward caches I've done, from the Sydney Harbour tourist photo spots to the Fortress Canyon waterfall in the Blue Mountains and all the ones in between, for they all bring something to the game beyond just a +1 in the stats. They're each a CO's one-off special gift to the community and, to me, they're as much about what the CO got out of creating it as what I got out of completing it.

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

If you live there you could have placed a physical cache (or if you don't live there, someone else could have) and told the story with that. The remote places I refer to are unlikely to be able to have physical caches (or new ones) as no cacher lives close enough. Using the virtual for that, as I did, rather than shove in another cache among thousands where I live, presents an opportunity to spread geocaching further.

 

I did have a cache there.  MKH in the fence.  It got muggled often.  Part of my Geoart series.  When my caching partner died, I archived the series.  Too far for me to maintain properly.  Almost seven years since I archived it.  No one has hidden a new cache anywhere nearby since.  It's a very special place, and deserved a cache.  

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

I was lucky enough to get a Virtual 3.0 awarded. I chose to put it at a very unique location in Bend Oregon. About 90% of the finders post a selfie but they have the option of naming 2 nearby businesses. The virtual has over 140 finds since March 1 and about 25% of finders give a favorite point.  My concern is that all of the finders are listed as Premium Members even though I did not check to box to make it premium only. I have had a complaint that it is not available to non-premium geocachers. 

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, tomfuller & Quill said:

I was lucky enough to get a Virtual 3.0 awarded. I chose to put it at a very unique location in Bend Oregon. About 90% of the finders post a selfie but they have the option of naming 2 nearby businesses. The virtual has over 140 finds since March 1 and about 25% of finders give a favorite point.  My concern is that all of the finders are listed as Premium Members even though I did not check to box to make it premium only. I have had a complaint that it is not available to non-premium geocachers. 

 

Cache types other than traditional or event are unavailable to basic members in the official app but they can still access them on the website.

  • Helpful 4
Link to comment
34 minutes ago, tomfuller & Quill said:

I have had a complaint that it is not available to non-premium geocachers. 

Your cache is not listed as PM.  I would explain that to the person who complained.

Here is the website map view from a non PM account, showing your virtual, and logging is available. At least 3 Basic Members have logged that cache.

It is not visible on the app for Basic Members, but that has nothing to do with the PM status of the cache.

 

 

Bend virtual from non PM account.png

Edited by Max and 99
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
14 hours ago, tomfuller & Quill said:

I was lucky enough to get a Virtual 3.0 awarded.

My concern is that all of the finders are listed as Premium Members even though I did not check to box to make it premium only. I have had a complaint that it is not available to non-premium geocachers. 

 

Cool.  :)

I access caches 2 and above in terrain, and haven't accessed a pmo cache in years, so guess I don't understand the concern.

If you had "a" complaint that it's not pmo, was it by a premium member? 

Basic members can't access "advanced" caches with the app.  That is, those caches above 2 in difficulty and terrain, and those "other than" traditional. 

Going to the website, any basic member can access all those other caches.  GPSrs are handy here...

Basic members can't see pmo caches with the app or on the website.

At one time the app incorrectly called "advanced" caches (those over the 2 D/T limit) premium caches. That should have been fixed by now...

 

Edited by cerberus1
  • Funny 1
Link to comment
On 7/6/2022 at 4:37 AM, bartrod said:

A recent visitor to the virtual site claims to have posted the photo and sent the answer.

I had a problem log for my first virtual cache that I published this year. A couple of people logged in, which included the FTF, and answered the answers correctly plus supplied the necessary photographs. However, then someone logged it and said they took the photograph but it failed. The answers were not all correct either. I wrote back saying that was awkward as the answers were not all correct, and no photograph. Plus they claimed the log before the virtual was published. This was my subtle answer, hoping they would delete it. They didn't. They suppled other, what I consider generic photographs of the area, but the date on them was before the date the cache was published. I replied to them saying I expected them to have deleted their find after my earlier message. I said truth sometimes works better than making up stories, and it was unfair on the FTF, as they dated their find before them. I deleted their log. It's a remote cache, and I am willing to believe they visited the area several days before the cache was published. It can be disappointing, especially as my cache is a SideTracked one, and a subset of geocachers collect those. That's why I said sometimes truth is better than making up stories. I can be flexible, but don't like being lied to as though I wouldn't see through the lie, or someone logging before the FTF.

 

I have also just deleted four logs without signatures on a traditional cache. I asked for some other proof that they had found the cache and gave them a week to reply. Three never replied and they were easy to delete. The fourth though had replied and we had some back and forth. They did describe the cache container. However, some others had included pictures of that in their logs, which the person could have seen. Those photographs now deleted. They could not describe the hide though, saying it was some time ago*, they couldn't remember. Regretfully I deleted that one, as unlike the others they did reply. I still feel a bit bad about that, but those are the rules; sign the log.

 

*I once had another person say the same thing. They said they find lots of caches and can't remember them all. They had supposedly found the cache the day before.

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
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...