Geocache Condition Report (free t-shirt)

[+trekkerdmc]

I received an email from lee@geocaching.com asking to participate in a "geocache condition Report" and would receive a free geocaching t-shirt. It asks to check 25 geocaches near me (whether I've found before) or not and to complete the report. When I looked further it said my email account could not access the report and asked if I wanted to use a different account.

 

It looks pretty legit but wanted so see if this is sponsored by HQ or if any others have received this message?

[+TeamRabbitRun]

Doesn't pass MY smell-test.

Sounds like a phishing expedition. Bet they ask for more info aside from another verified email address to sell.

Then MORE info from you.

 

REALLY look at the addresses and any links in the email before clicking on anything. Float your mouse over each hyperlink to see the address to which it points. Be suspicious.

 

If you want to check, email the SUPPORT link at the bottom of every page on the website.

See that? I didn't even give you an email address to use, because THAT'S scam-behavior, too!

[+trekkerdmc]

Thanks for the input TeamRabbitRun.

 

I was thinking it seemed a bit phishy. I got another e-mail from the person and it was marked as possibly unsafe from my e-mail carrier and that sealed the deal for me to NOT click on anything or give info to.

[Keystone]

See this thread in the German-speaking forum on the same subject.  It includes a helpful explanation (in English).

[+trekkerdmc]

Thanks Keystone!

[+TeamRabbitRun]

4 minutes ago, Keystone said:

See this thread in the German-speaking forum on the same subject.  It includes a helpful explanation (in English).

 

Well, OK then - apparently legit!

 

What did it for me was the part about using a different email address because 'his email address wouldn't work', whatever that means. That's why I advocated giving it a good going-over.

 

I'd be interested in reading about what you're doing and seeing what you learn.

[+BirdSearcher]

 

5 hours ago, Keystone said:

See this thread in the German-speaking forum on the same subject.  It includes a helpful explanation (in English).

I would love to participate in this , hope my part of Canada can be part of the study.

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, BirdSearcher said:

 

I would love to participate in this , hope my part of Canada can be part of the study.

 

I'm glad I wasn't, as the 25 traditionals closest to me (that I don't own) include one T4.5, three T4s, a T3.5 and seven T3s, so not something that could be knocked over in one afternoon, particularly in the late summer heat and humidity we currently have. Some of those have absent owners but are still being found, some have historical outstanding NMs that turned out to be irrelevant (one a heads-up on roadworks that ended up not disturbing the cache) and some have recent DNFs but are tricky to find and likely to still be there. I wonder, if one of the chosen checkers can't find the cache, if it gets deemed to be missing or whether there's an allowance for it just outsmarting them. Does the CO get to provide any input?

[+HuggableHamster]

8 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I'm glad I wasn't, as the 25 traditionals closest to me (that I don't own) include one T4.5, three T4s, a T3.5 and seven T3s, so not something that could be knocked over in one afternoon, particularly in the late summer heat and humidity we currently have. Some of those have absent owners but are still being found, some have historical outstanding NMs that turned out to be irrelevant (one a heads-up on roadworks that ended up not disturbing the cache) and some have recent DNFs but are tricky to find and likely to still be there. I wonder, if one of the chosen checkers can't find the cache, if it gets deemed to be missing or whether there's an allowance for it just outsmarting them. Does the CO get to provide any input?

Me too, although because I’m saving my nearest trads for filling in my calendar rather than because they are particularly high T!  My friend got chosen though so I’m going to go and help her (though we are skipping out the ones you need a particular type of boat for!

[+AbacoRick]

I received an email as well and was likewise, dubious.  But if it was a phishing attempt they went to alot of trouble, as they knew my "handle" and the 25 caches they want me to check are all legit and geolocated close to my home.   Unfortunately, many of them were rough to find and I'm not sure I have those bushwhacks in me again.   To get better participation, they need to do a little better job identifying themselves in this process, as it comes across as "phishy".   The word "Groundspeak" appears nowhere so I also was wary.

[+Jayeffel]

Just signed on to see if there was anything about this.-- I signed on and it knew my user name and had 25 caches close to me ; but the list only showed 21, the map beside the list showed all of them though.

 

One happens to be my own and one cache I was contemplating not going for - a 35 foot crawl in a storm sewer! The rest I found already--just to remember where!

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, Jayeffel said:

One happens to be my own and one cache I was contemplating not going for - a 35 foot crawl in a storm sewer! The rest I found already--just to remember where!

 

It seems odd that they're including your own caches in this. Looking at the nearest 25 traditionals to me, I own 8 of them and, since they're apparently interested in cache quality as well as health, it would hardly be an unbiassed assessment.

[+trekkerdmc]

After reading the post and the attached link from Keystone, things apparently are legit and I have received my list of caches to go rate. 

[+Jayeffel]

9 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

It seems odd that they're including your own caches in this. Looking at the nearest 25 traditionals to me, I own 8 of them and, since they're apparently interested in cache quality as well as health, it would hardly be an unbiassed assessment.

This note is on the cache list page: "Note: You must visit caches you already found or you own for this study in order to obtain unbiased data on cache condition in your area." 

 

Hopefully each cacher will be as honest with personal caches as with others. 

 

[+Jayeffel]

I know this in an outside of Geocaching.com study, but the list is to show 25 nearest traditional caches; the list I have  shows 21, the map beside that list does show 25. However, I checked three of the caches today and one was in good shape, the other two were not there any longer.

 

I could only record survey response for two , the third does not show on the list, but does show on the mail but clicking on the cache icon does nothing. 

 

And I guess that a log entry such as NM or just a note about the cache is permissible with the Geocache Cache Condition Research Study. I thunk when I do  write a note I will mentioned it was checked to complete the study.

[Moun10Bike]

14 minutes ago, Jayeffel said:

I know this in an outside of Geocaching.com study, but the list is to show 25 nearest traditional caches; the list I have  shows 21, the map beside that list does show 25. However, I checked three of the caches today and one was in good shape, the other two were not there any longer.

 

Your 25 are there, but you have to scroll your list. The scrollbar will not appear until you hover over the list.

 

[+Jayeffel]

I will check, thought I did that!

 

Edit: Went back and after maybe five or six tries at that scrolling they finally showed up.

Edited March 2 by Jayeffel

[+barefootjeff]

9 hours ago, Jayeffel said:

This note is on the cache list page: "Note: You must visit caches you already found or you own for this study in order to obtain unbiased data on cache condition in your area." 

 

Hopefully each cacher will be as honest with personal caches as with others. 

 

 

I guess it depends on what they're asking about the caches. If it's objective stuff like "Is the container damaged?" or "Is the log wet or full?" then it probably wouldn't matter who owned the cache, but if it's a more subjective assessment of cache quality ("Would you give this an FP if you were finding it today?") then, well, I know the community response to my caches is often quite different to what I expected, good and bad.

[+trekkerdmc]

19 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I guess it depends on what they're asking about the caches. If it's objective stuff like "Is the container damaged?" or "Is the log wet or full?" then it probably wouldn't matter who owned the cache, but if it's a more subjective assessment of cache quality ("Would you give this an FP if you were finding it today?") then, well, I know the community response to my caches is often quite different to what I expected, good and bad.

It is totally objective. They want 3 pictures. One of the container, the log and the surrounding area so it's not real issue with taking data on your own hides. They're looking at data for the algorithm to see if it lines up with posted logs and such

[+Jayeffel]

I have no idea how to take a picture on my iPhone and put it on their survey screen.

 

Edit: Sent them Study  people a message concerning this and one solution they recommended does not work for me. So another one can be tried.

Edited March 3 by Jayeffel

[+barefootjeff]

4 hours ago, trekkerdmc said:

It is totally objective. They want 3 pictures. One of the container, the log and the surrounding area so it's not real issue with taking data on your own hides. They're looking at data for the algorithm to see if it lines up with posted logs and such

 

That's good to know, although if I was taking photos of my own hides I'd probably spruce them up a bit first . Trying to judge cache quality often comes down to personal tastes...

 

[+Jayeffel]

Wonder how many cachers are selected and how many in a general area. 

[+Jayeffel]

I completed my assigned caches today; one new one and one of my own plus 23 others.  I could not locate (re-locate )seven of them ; two of those have been archived since. Several had logs that need attention, but all caches I located had containers that were intact and decent.

 

They wanted pictures of the container, the log, and the general area of each cache. I was able to do so on maybe six or seven caches, had no clue how to for a while,  then had too many hoops to jump through . 

 

The one cache that was new was one I was putting off, almost decided to forego it, but it  was not nearly as bad as I anticipated. The water level was only an inch above my boots!