Jump to content

Deleting logs for stolen/shared puzzle final locs


Recommended Posts

Where I'm from, someone started a website for sharing finals of puzzle / multi caches a long time ago and it cought on.

 

I discussed this with experienced cachers from my community and I'm told the trend is that close to 75% of all the finds for any D3+ puzzle/multi is being acquired through the site. So almost noone is actually solving the harder puzzles except for the first few and then just here or there - mostly people who don't know about the site.

 

I'm wondering if it is within the rules for me, as the CO, to delete the logs of people who I know did not solve the puzzle. Pertinent info is that the site doesn't provide you the solution, it only provides you with the final coords. So, if there are people solving in groups, they are free to share the steps needed to get to the solution, and that is fine. Which I would specificaly state in the listing. Hence, this would only affect people who pirated the coords.

  • Funny 3
Link to comment

I can't see that you can delete the logs, unless they didn't sign the log. I have accidently found several puzzle caches for instance, and as I found them, I logged them. The last one I found was in a small bushland, and walking through I found a cache out in the open. (Made up for the DNF I was coming from.) The cache didn't have a GC number or name, but I worked out which cache it was and logged it, telling the owner I rescued their cache and re-hid it. Another, I reached into a metal sculpture telling a companion this would make a good hide and...:o...then pulled out the cache and said, "Just like this one." No CO has ever told me I couldn't log those. Not the only finds like that. Basically that's similar to what you describe, as I never solved those puzzles and multis.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

How would you police this?

If you require the finders to send you a PM or email with their solving method, that's an Additional Logging Requirement and not allowed.

If you go with your intuition, that will easily be overruled by Appeals.

So no, I'm pretty certain that if they sign the log, they can log a find, regardless of how they got the final coords.

It sucks, but sometimes people suck.

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 4
Link to comment

From the Guidelines:

 

For physical caches other than challenge caches, any additional logging requirement (ALR) beyond finding the cache and signing the log must be optional. Caches can be logged online as "Found" after the geocacher has visited the coordinates and signed the logbook.

 

So no, you can't delete someone's log if they didn't get the final coordinates by solving the puzzle or visiting the earlier stages of a multi. Once there's a signature in the logbook, the online log is valid.

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

I discussed this with experienced cachers from my community and I'm told the trend is that close to 75% of all the finds for any D3+ puzzle/multi is being acquired through the site.

 

I'm really surprised about the 75%.  Maybe 75% just acquired through the site you are talking about, but add another 15-20% final coordinates received by other cachers.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Many puzzles require solving for a keyword then enter on certitude to get the final coordinates. However, you can remain anonymous so how are you going to prove it. Also This week I am staying less than a mile from a cache I solved maybe 5 years ago how are you going to correlate something like that. 

If word gets out, I would suspect someone would simply upload the rest of your information and then you have the same problem all over again.

 

If it bugs you I'd suggest getting out of the business of hiding puzzles. Cheating happens, who does it hurt? Not me. Yeah it sucks.

 

Personally only deleted 2 logs that were completely obvious. The first a new cacher from Sweeden (I'm in Oregon USA) found like 50 caches on the same day all over the world. Sent a question to him no response so deleted. The second was a guy from the UK who found like 20 caches on the same day in England and the hopped on a plan to rural North Carolina and then to my rural cache in Oregon. He admitted accidentally logging the two US caches and we both deleted them. I'm pretty sure I have other fake cachers but never bother to check or audit logs. If someone really wants the smiley they can have it. 

 

I have also logged accidentally  found puzzle caches. I solved the problem another way that the CO did not think could happen. It took research. I had the coordinates and was able to certify my solution.

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Semínko said:

Where I'm from, someone started a website for sharing finals of puzzle / multi caches a long time ago and it cought on.

I discussed this with experienced cachers from my community and I'm told the trend is that close to 75% of all the finds for any D3+ puzzle/multi is being acquired through the site. So almost noone is actually solving the harder puzzles except for the first few and then just here or there - mostly people who don't know about the site.

 

I'm wondering if it is within the rules for me, as the CO, to delete the logs of people who I know did not solve the puzzle. Pertinent info is that the site doesn't provide you the solution, it only provides you with the final coords. So, if there are people solving in groups, they are free to share the steps needed to get to the solution, and that is fine. Which I would specificaly state in the listing. Hence, this would only affect people who pirated the coords.

 

I think it's in poor taste, cheating, and if they're braggarts, maybe I'll make fun of them at events.    :)

 - But saying that as many as 75% are cheating I feel can't be correct...   

We see the PAF network, now that phones are the norm "helping" is high, but 75% is still a lot.

 

I've found puzzle/mystery caches by accident, "this looks like a good spot to...", and there's already a cache there. I sign those logs.

Curious how you'd know for sure some didn't solve your puzzle. Telling folks what you'll accept is (I feel) an ALR, and not allowed.

If I find your cache and sign the log and you delete me, Geocaching HQ will be sending you an email...

I've cached with a person that's crippled (and smart), and he solved the puzzle while I (who's not...) accessed the (usually) cache in a tree. 

We're a team.  He solved it and gives me the final coordinates. Sounds sorta what you're upset about...

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

Basically, it would work the same way as the challenge caches. I don't know how it works in the US, but here we have challenge caches, which are in fact puzzle caches where one doesn't have to find final coords. In other words the posted and final coords match. But, for your log to be accepted you have to meet certain criteria, ie have at least 300 found caches in specific region. So if you physically log the cache without meeting the criteria, which is checked AFTER you log in online, your log will be deleted by the CO - no questions asked.

 

As for your point of "Someone would just upload the rest of the information.", that's not how that works. The site is pretty structured. It's not like a forum where one can write anything. So sure, people would be able to communicate what has to happen for their log to be accepted by other means, but that's fine. By cutting the website off, the majority of cheating would be thwarted.

Even the example with the disabled person is fine - as per my example above, the only thing that would need to happen is for both of you having to solve the puzzle - ie do some online action (which precedes getting the coords), which would then log that info into a db etc...

  • Funny 1
Link to comment
4 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

From the Guidelines:

 

For physical caches other than challenge caches, any additional logging requirement (ALR) beyond finding the cache and signing the log must be optional. Caches can be logged online as "Found" after the geocacher has visited the coordinates and signed the logbook.

 

So no, you can't delete someone's log if they didn't get the final coordinates by solving the puzzle or visiting the earlier stages of a multi. Once there's a signature in the logbook, the online log is valid.

Fair enough.

Link to comment

I have developed a couple of puzzle caches where the finder can (optionally) prove that they solved the puzzle.  I did it mainly for the fun of it, as I don't particularly care whether finders have solved the puzzle or not, but it was an interesting exercise.

 

The technique I used was to generate a cryptographic token that can verified that shows that your username has solved the puzzle.  Everyone can send the token to the server, which will decrypt it.

 

The caches for which I have implemented this scheme are GCPNXY (based on mastermind) and GC85149 (based on hashing).

 

I emphasize that including the token in a log is optional, not required.  However, it allows people who have actually solved the puzzle prove it to everyone else.

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1
  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, fizzymagic said:

The technique I used was to generate a cryptographic token that can verified that shows that your username has solved the puzzle.

Yup, I was thinking along the same lines

 

BTW, I love the qoute: "If you log the cache without a token, I won't delete it, but everyone will know you cheated!"

Edited by Semínko
  • Funny 1
  • Surprised 2
Link to comment
9 hours ago, Semínko said:

Where I'm from, someone started a website for sharing finals of puzzle / multi caches a long time ago and it cought on.

 

I discussed this with experienced cachers from my community and I'm told the trend is that close to 75% of all the finds for any D3+ puzzle/multi is being acquired through the site. So almost noone is actually solving the harder puzzles except for the first few and then just here or there - mostly people who don't know about the site.

 

I'm wondering if it is within the rules for me, as the CO, to delete the logs of people who I know did not solve the puzzle. Pertinent info is that the site doesn't provide you the solution, it only provides you with the final coords. So, if there are people solving in groups, they are free to share the steps needed to get to the solution, and that is fine. Which I would specificaly state in the listing. Hence, this would only affect people who pirated the coords.

As others have said, you are not allowed to delete logs, where the finder's signature is in the physical logbook.

 

I know your situation (most logs from "cheaters") pretty well. I found it rather effective to move the final of a mystery - I did this for some of my puzzles, and the number of logs, where the finder most likely has never looked at the puzzle, let alone solved it, dropped significantly for a very long time (several years). So these "coordinate trading" sites are apparently not very effective in updating their solution ;) .

 

As a poorf-of-concept, if an "uncheatable" mystery in possible, I created a mystery cache, which you can only find, if you (or at least one member of the group) has actually solved the puzzle and still remembers the principles of the solution. It is very difficult puzzle (D5), whose solution leads you to stage 1 of the outdoor part. There you find a field puzzle, which is rather easy to solve if you solved the puzzle in listing, but impossible otherwise. But the crucial point is that after every(!) find, I moved the final box and exchanged the field puzzle accordingly. Needless to say, this was an immense effort for me, especially in the first months. But it basically worked: The number of obvious "coordinate grabber" logs (you know them when you read them ;) ) was exactly zero. However, the whole concept is of course pure overkill for the "average" mystery, and in the end I don't think it was worth the effort.

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Semínko said:

As for your point of "Someone would just upload the rest of the information.", that's not how that works. The site is pretty structured. It's not like a forum where one can write anything. So sure, people would be able to communicate what has to happen for their log to be accepted by other means, but that's fine. By cutting the website off, the majority of cheating would be thwarted.

 

Well... then they'll just change their website to be more like a forum... right? But you're okay with that? ("so sure ... that's fine") How exactly does that thwart cheating? I'm confused...

Edited by Hügh
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Hügh said:

 

Well... then they'll just change their website to be more like a forum... right? But you're okay with that? ("so sure ... that's fine") How exactly does that thwart cheating? I'm confused...

Long term, you're right, obviously. BUT... They will not change the website for a few "uncheatable" caches. That's the point.

Link to comment

A brother-in-law dared me to put out a GeoArt series.  So, I did.  Hmm (said I), I could make one of these a 5/1 cache!  So, I did.  Very tough puzzle!  Few cachers solved it.  But one of the early finders noted that there was a distance between two of the caches, and went there and searched.  And found it.  (Hmm...   That never occured to me...)  Most of the finders used his theory and found it!  They signed the log.  That's a valid find to log it.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 5
Link to comment
12 hours ago, Harry Dolphin said:

A brother-in-law dared me to put out a GeoArt series.  So, I did.  Hmm (said I), I could make one of these a 5/1 cache!  So, I did.  Very tough puzzle!  Few cachers solved it.  But one of the early finders noted that there was a distance between two of the caches, and went there and searched.  And found it.  (Hmm...   That never occured to me...)  Most of the finders used his theory and found it!  They signed the log.  That's a valid find to log it.  

At an event some time ago a local cacher said that he had created a power trail of puzzle caches and the he expected that they would be published in a few days time.

 

One bright spark looked at the local map, worked out which road the caches would be hidden on, searched, found one and then headed along the road and FTFed the lot before publication.

 

Some FTF hounds were not amused.

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 10
  • Love 1
Link to comment
On 7/6/2022 at 6:39 PM, cerberus1 said:

We see the PAF network, now that phones are the norm "helping" is high, but 75% is still a lot.

Note that it was 75% of finds on D3+ , not 75% of finders. It sounds reasonable to me; the people who systematcally cheat to get finds have a lot more finds on these caches than people who just geocache for fun. (Obviously no one can really know the actual percentages.)

 

We don’t have a whole cheat site, but cheating has become normalized. It would be nice Groundspeak enforced their Terms of Use, and used their platform to guide the community more. Both away from cheating but also puzzle/multi COs towards creating more logical puzzles and being more respectful of finders’ time.

  • Upvote 3
  • Funny 2
Link to comment

I am not a puzzle solver cacher.  I look at many of them and have absolutely no idea where to start.

 

But there are Cachers that love those obscure and very difficult challenges and I think there is room for them in our community. It is sad to me that some want to cheat.   But where is the line to be drawn?  If I were so inclined I could ask for a hint, multiple hints, or even go caching with someone who has already solved the puzzle.  In that case did I solve the puzzle? Should I get credit?  

 

I mostly cache by myself and I am comfortable that I have found the cache, signed the log, and therefore can claim the find.  I happen to be in the category of vertically challenged Cachers and I can think of two caches that I could see but not reach.  I did not claim them but I certainly do remember them.  I also carry a 2' step ladder now to help me with caches just out of my reach.

 

The beauty of caching is that I am not competing. I am finding the caches that appeal to me at the moment and I don't worry about those geocachers with different scruples.

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

It would be nice Groundspeak enforced their Terms of Use, and used their platform to guide the community more.

 

Investigating each and every instance of alleged "cheating" would require a bunch of effort on HQ's part. Part of me would not mind, after all, I pay for a Premium membership, they can hire someone. At the same time however I'd prefer if they focussed their energy on parts of the website that are broken. (That last one, while fixed, took a whole month!)

Edited by Hügh
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
12 hours ago, mustakorppi said:

... cheating has become normalized.

:sad:  

 

4 hours ago, Smitherington said:

I am not a puzzle solver cacher.  I look at many of them and have absolutely no idea where to start.

 

But there are Cachers that love those obscure and very difficult challenges and I think there is room for them in our community. .... If I were so inclined I could ask for a hint, multiple hints, or even go caching with someone who has already solved the puzzle.  In that case did I solve the puzzle? Should I get credit?  

 

I mostly cache by myself and I am comfortable that I have found the cache, signed the log, and therefore can claim the find.  I happen to be in the category of vertically challenged Cachers and I can think of two caches that I could see but not reach.  I did not claim them but I certainly do remember them.

^ ^ ^

This resonates with me for many reasons.  I am one of those cachers that DOES enjoy a challenging puzzle.  I  ask for hints from CO's if I need to - we discuss difficult puzzles at events.  I sometimes cache alone, though I am usually with groups of various cachers.  Some do not do puzzles, but if we are caching together I am happy to share my solution and we all log the find.  I've also found myself on the other end of things - I did not solve the puzzle, but someone in the group did, and I claimed the find after we found the cache.  Some puzzles were a team effort to solve, and find.  I don't use webites that just hand out the solutions - I like to work through the puzzle!

 

I am also "vertically challenged" - if I am with someone who can retrieve the cache I will gladly sign it and watch while they put it back!  If I am alone, and there is no way I can reach it on my own, I wrtie a note, and come back another time with a tool or another cacher who CAN reach it.

 

The guidelines are just that, guidelines.  

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

Investigating each and every instance of alleged "cheating" would require a bunch of effort on HQ's part.

I mean there aren’t that many sites that openly hand out coordinates. And they already have people posting on blog and speaking/barking on podcast so all that would be needed is willingness to take step away from the fluff and take a stance on what geocaching is and isn’t. E.g. that puzzle/multi caches are meant to be different from trads, and if you always treat them like trads you are doing it wrong and your precious stats are now even more meaningless than imaginary points on the internet usually are.

 

Agreed that it shouldn’t be the devs doing this :lol: but HQ’s priorities (and reason for existing) are another topic entirely, where looking at response time to individual bugs is kind of not seeing the forest for the trees…
 

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, mustakorppi said:

Agreed that it shouldn’t be the devs doing this :lol: but HQ’s priorities (and reason for existing) are another topic entirely, where looking at response time to individual bugs is kind of not seeing the forest for the trees…

 

I wasn't really suggesting that the developers do the work. But I think you know that. :)

 

As much as I want the "cheaters" to go, I would just rather have my $30 go towards development and site functionality, rather than resolving disputes about how the game is "supposed" to be played. Consider even just the "basic" rule of "sign the logbook" — which they do enforce, if there is disagreement between hider and finder — it must be depressing to be the Lackey(s) who has to mediate those arguments. It's about ink on bits of paper! It's supposed to be a fun game! I'd rather not increase their workload. (@Keystone might have some comments about this?)

 

That said, I am not opposed, and it sounds like you aren't either, to improving the guidance/messaging on their website. One mention in the TOS does not suffice. And it's not just about solution-sharing, but also puzzle-constructing too. It wouldn't fully stop the cheaters, nor will it allow OP to delete logs on their puzzles (the original point of this thread; wow this feels barely on-topic) but it might "inspire" some people. 

 

15 hours ago, mustakorppi said:

Both away from cheating but also puzzle/multi COs towards creating more logical puzzles and being more respectful of finders’ time.

 

I, for one, hate jigsaw puzzles. I think there is a whole other thread about these so I will keep it brief, but I'll say that I have my magic ways of solving them. Does that "count"? I don't know. I just find that they are not—I like your word—respectful of my time. Even with the most basic Google-fu trivia puzzle; maybe I learn something interesting. Such language in the guidelines would be appreciated. 

Edited by Hügh
  • Helpful 2
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...