Country souvenir for adventure stage

[+Gill & Tony]

If your only finds in a country are adventure stages (lab caches) do you receive the country souvenir?

 

Or does it only get awarded correctly caches with a GC code?

 

Thanks

 

Tony

[+peter-tvm]

Country souvenirs is only given when logging a found/attended/webcam picture taken on geocaches. 

So you get no country souvenir by finding only Adventure Lab Caches.

[+Gill & Tony]

That's what I suspected.  Thanks for confirming it.

[+GeoElmo6000]

Lab caches are not geocaches and therefore you do not receive a geocaching souvenir for finding one.

[Moun10Bike]

Adventures (and Adventure locations) do not have assigned countries and regions like geocaches, only coordinates. As a result, they do not trigger country- and region-based souvenirs.

[+HHL]

37 minutes ago, Moun10Bike said:

only coordinates. As a result, they do not trigger country- and region-based souvenirs.

HQ engineers are not aware which coordinates are located within a country's boundary? Unbelievable.

[Moun10Bike]

5 minutes ago, HHL said:

HQ engineers are not aware which coordinates are located within a country's boundary? Unbelievable.

 

I did not say that. There is a difference between geocoding coordinates and a souvenir system that triggers off of the country or region ID associated with a listing. Adventures are a completely different animal from geocaches in our systems and simply do not have country or region IDs (as well as other things, like D/T ratings). They could certainly be given these values, but that's not how they are currently handled.

[+HHL]

16 minutes ago, Moun10Bike said:

They could certainly be given these values, but that's not how they are currently handled.

Understand. ;-) It would be nice if this was part of HQ's future plans with AdLabs. (next to others like a real Reference Code and GPX files (at least for completed ALs)).

 

Happy Coding

Hans

Edited December 26, 2023 by HHL

[+Gill & Tony]

@Moun10Bike

 

Thanks for the official answer and explanation.

[+CaracalShan]

This is my no 1 thing that I would love to see being added: Labcaches counting towards countries, counties, etc. Nowadays they almost always count towards souvenir-campaigns, so I really don't understand why that is not the case for countries etc. The way it's now, it still feels HQ doesn't see them as 'real' geocaches although they count towards your total number of finds, streaks, and other statistics. Apart from the technical aspect (which apparently could be solved), is there a (good) reason why they are not included in country finds?

[+JL_HSTRE]

Adventure Labs counting toward geographic souvenirs sounds like something people would use to fraudulently get souvenirs they don't deserve.

 

Even though the AL app is supposed to be able to detect GPS spoofing I'm doubtful of Groundspeak's ability to stay ahead of the spoofers.

 

I expect it would also result in people putting ALs with the widest possible geofencing near borders to "legitimately" gain the souvenir without actually crossing the border. Visit the DMZ; get the North Korea souvenir you've always wanted!

 

It's become painfully clear that any improvements to AL have to be weighed against anticipated abuses of the system.

[+Gill & Tony]

I don't understand why people care whether other people cheat to get a souvenir.

 

All my souvenirs are legitimately earned, but I couldn't care less if some random cacher is getting souvenirs they haven't earned.  How does that affect me, or anybody else?  Souvenirs don't have any value, so they aren't debasing them.  The fact that they have one doesn't stop someone else from having the same one - they are in infinite supply.  The only possible "problem" is them qualifying for a challenge they haven't really earned.  But, provided their find is legitimate, how does that affect anyone else?

 

Claiming fake finds on real caches can affect others.  But souvenirs?

[+JL_HSTRE]

12 hours ago, Gill & Tony said:

I don't understand why people care whether other people cheat

 

"I don't understand why people care about ethics."

 

Nobody who cheats at geocaching cheats only at geocaching.

 

Edited December 28, 2023 by JL_HSTRE

[+Gill & Tony]

7 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

 

"I don't understand why people care about ethics."

 

Nobody who cheats at geocaching cheats only at geocaching.

 

Selectively quoting part of a sentence to distort its meaning is bad ethics.  Hypocritical.

 

Evidence, please for your second sentence.

[+MNTA]

I agree GS needs to incorporate fully into the game or drop them.  I would like my Texas souvenir please.

 

As for cheating. Who cares does not bother me in the slightest. Signing a log is not proof either as half the time they eventually go missing as well. 

[+Goldenwattle]

1 hour ago, MNTA said:

Signing a log is not proof either as half the time they eventually go missing as well. 

Only if a CO doesn't do regular checks and maintenance, or puts the cache in an unwise place. I regularly check my caches, and the log is rarely missing, but because I do regularly check the cache (how often depends where the cache is, etc), even if the log did go missing, I would still have photographs of most past logs. I put the latest photograph of the signatures in my maintenance log as a record. Then if the log goes missing this copy still exists.

An example. Checked after 11 months from the previous check. It's an eleven stage multi, and doesn't get found that often. It's been sitting in the weather (although somewhat protected by the overhead oak tree) for 8 years. It's the original log and as can be seen in the photographs of the log, still good.

 

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC61P7D_narrabundah-ramble

[+JL_HSTRE]

19 hours ago, Gill & Tony said:

Selectively quoting part of a sentence to distort its meaning is bad ethics.  Hypocritical.

 

Ever heard an expression along the lines of "you used N more words than necessary"? You used 4 more words than you needed to. It literally does not matter how you finished that sentence. It doesn't matter if you're cheating at geocaching or low-stakes poker or your taxes or your spouse. Cheating is wrong.

 

The pandemic laid it all bare. People wont obey the speed limit or parking regulations or restrictions about where they can take their dog. Why should they obey mask mandates? They cheat because they're selfish and entitled and they have no integrity.

 

Integrity is doing the right thing even when nobody is watching. And usually nobody is watching you geocache.

 

13 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Only if a CO doesn't do regular checks and maintenance, or puts the cache in an unwise place. I regularly check my caches, and the log is rarely missing, but because I do regularly check the cache (how often depends where the cache is, etc), even if the log did go missing, I would still have photographs of most past logs. I put the latest photograph of the signatures in my maintenance log as a record. Then if the log goes missing this copy still exists.

 

COs reconciling physical logs with online logs is extremely rare in practice. I would be shocked if it's even 1% of COs who actively maintain their caches, much less all the COs who don't maintain their caches or are completely inactive.

[+CaracalShan]

If people want to cheat to earn a country souvenir they don't need Adventure Labs... You can find enough caches from CO's who are unactive, or caches that are wet/damaged/gone/... and are being logged without singing the log. There are plenty of ways to earn a regional souvenir if you really want it. You can even write an online log, and then delete it, but you will keep the souvenir. So I don't think Labs change anything to that...

[+Gill & Tony]

4 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

 

Ever heard an expression along the lines of "you used N more words than necessary"? You used 4 more words than you needed to. It literally does not matter how you finished that sentence. It doesn't matter if you're cheating at geocaching or low-stakes poker or your taxes or your spouse. Cheating is wrong.

 

The pandemic laid it all bare. People wont obey the speed limit or parking regulations or restrictions about where they can take their dog. Why should they obey mask mandates? They cheat because they're selfish and entitled and they have no integrity.

 

Integrity is doing the right thing even when nobody is watching. And usually nobody is watching you geocache.

 

Yes, cheating is wrong.  However, I used precisely the right number of words.   I don't care is someone is only cheating themselves.  I don't care if the chap playing solitaire at the next table in the cafe is cheating.  He is only cheating himself.  He is not affecting me or anyone else

 

I don't care if someone cheats to get a souvenir.  They are only cheating themselves.  They aren't affecting me or anyone else.

 

Cheating on your spouse or at poker or claiming finds on caches you haven't visited does affect other people.   I do care about that.

 

Breaking the law is a whole different scenario.

 

Where do you draw the line for cheating at geocaching? 

 

If two people are caching together and one finds the cache and signs both names?  The other did not find the cache.  What if each signs their own name.

 

If one climbs the tree and the other remains on the ground?

 

If a team splits up into separate groups and all names go into every log?

 

Moving identical containers on a power trail.  Containers are not being replaced as found.

 

Failing to log a DNF

 

Deleting a NM log on your cache to make it look better

 

Asking friends to give FPs to your cache

 

Cheating at geocaching is a moving target.  Everyone draws a different line.

 

 

 

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, Gill & Tony said:

Cheating at geocaching is a moving target.  Everyone draws a different line.

 

I think the bigger issue here isn't individuals cheating, but it encouraging the creation of ALs whose sole purpose is to facilitate claiming souvenirs for countries players haven't visited. It's not likely to happen in this part of the world, but there are places in Europe (looking at the map, perhaps Austria), where you could get within the geofence of AL locations in multiple countries without crossing any borders or even getting out of your car. Sure, it doesn't affect me but it does taint the game's overall integrity appearance.

[+Goldenwattle]

4 hours ago, CaracalShan said:

If people want to cheat to earn a country souvenir they don't need Adventure Labs... You can find enough caches from CO's who are unactive, or caches that are wet/damaged/gone/... and are being logged without singing the log. There are plenty of ways to earn a regional souvenir if you really want it. You can even write an online log, and then delete it, but you will keep the souvenir. So I don't think Labs change anything to that...

Yes, I saw a cache log the other day with a find logged for a cache in Australia with words something like, "I have never visited Australia, but I decided to log a cache there." If that was my cache as soon as I saw the email, I would delete it. No need to go out and check the log for that one. As it was still on the cache log after a few days (weeks?) it seems the CO of that cache is just leaving the armchair logger's log there.

Where it gets really annoying, is where the CO does nothing about these logs, and ruins others using that cache to fulfil a Challenge. I see that as selfish of both the logger and the CO. The CO for not making it fair for all geocachers. Examples;

1. Years ago I was trying to build up enough caches for a find caches not found for six months challenge. This multicache had not been found for a year, but someone mucked that up by logging a find for, as they wrote, "Found the first WP." The CO never deleted that, even after being contacted. 

2. The second example could be logged, but it makes it unfair for those who really fulfilled the challenge, which was a VERY hard one. Find a cache is every Australian Territory in one calendar year. I qualified for that, but likely had to drive about 15,000kms to do it, and catch a ferry to Tasmania. You also naturally had to log the cache, which I did. Some people either never signed the log, or had only ever found caches in one Territory. The CO did nothing about either. If a CO makes a cache a challenge, that should check people do actually qualify. I suppose the warning there that the CO wouldn't be checking people qualified, is that this very hard challenge was only rated the (I don't really care) 1.5D/T.

 

9 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

COs reconciling physical logs with online logs is extremely rare in practice. I would be shocked if it's even 1% of COs who actively maintain their caches, much less all the COs who don't maintain their caches or are completely inactive.

Sadly you are correct, but I have found there is often a correlation between those who do check logs and take the appropriate action, and those who maintain their caches. The two go hand in hand. 

[+JL_HSTRE]

7 hours ago, Gill & Tony said:

 I don't care is someone is only cheating themselves.

 

I do.

 

Because I dislike living in a world (much less participating in a hobby) with cheaters, and with people who don't care about cheating.

 

Because like I said earlier they don't just stop at cheating at geocaching. Everything matters. Everything you do defines the kind of person you are.

 

Because even if I thought it was okay to cheat "when it doesn't matter" I don't trust people to decide correctly when it doesn't matter. People will go through all sorts of mental gymnastics to make excuses for themselves and their selfish desires.

 

Because this hobby has public logs and comparative statistics which means every log some fakes has an impact.

 

Because I agree with Jeff's comment about it tainting the image of the hobby. How many geocachers can be cheaters before geocaching becomes predominantly a hobby of cheaters? Given who was logging the armchair ALs the lack of integrity is so rampant I stopped participating in my local geocaching community; practically every notable local geocacher was guilty. 

 

We can debate endlessly what constitutes cheating. I'd rather we constantly try to fine tune that line than say it doesn't exist and it doesn't matter.

 

Edited December 30, 2023 by JL_HSTRE
Addendum

[+MNTA]

42 minutes ago, JL_HSTRE said:

 

I do.

 

Because I dislike living in a world (much less participating in a hobby) with cheaters, and with people who don't care about cheating.

 

Because like I said earlier they don't just stop at cheating at geocaching. Everything matters. Everything you do defines the kind of person you are.

 

I get it and do tend to agree. However, what it means is basically a radical change to the game, 

 

You need immediate verifiable proof of finding. This can be done in many ways. Though even any technological mechanism is still cheatable though the barrier to cheating is higher I'd assume. 

 

AL use geofencing which is a big plus but for the game as a whole is a challenge for areas with no internet/cell connection. 

Pictures uploaded to the web site removes the meta data. This could be used to cross reference location, however traditionalist who only use a GPSr would complain if they had to utilize some other kind of device.

Personally I like the idea of taking a picture to prove signing  and finding, however this could be cheated as well by getting a list of previous finders and creating a new log. Unless location is taken into consideration.

Codes or verification web sites could be given in the cache but then that information could be shared unless it dynamically changes but then that costs money.

Community policing of finds, more volunteers, reporting problems but what happens when a throw down is found .

 

There are lots of possibilities but all have problems.

 

 

 

[+HHL]

Unfortunately, the last few posts are about as inappropriate as they could be. Could you please stop this unpleasant behavior and go back on topic? Thanks.

[+Goldenwattle]

8 hours ago, MNTA said:

You need immediate verifiable proof of finding.

No, you don't need immediate verifiable proof of finding. You only need to check the log regularly, whether once every few months, or perhaps maybe every a couple of years. This depends on the number of loggers, where the cache is, and other factors. Compare the logs then and take a photograph of the log as a record. I add mine to the OM log. If I can't find a signature, I contact the person. If they can supply other proof of visit, such as a photograph, or a very good description of the log, cache and hide, I allow the log to stay. I do say they should sign the log. For very new beginners I have started being more lenient, saying I will accept the log this time, but please sign logs from now on. (If though I find they have again for a later find of one of my caches continued not to sign my logs I will likely delete both logs. That hasn't happened yet.)

I blame the lack of actual writing these days for more unsigned logs; with people (especially younger generations), hardly ever picking up a pen. 'Who' signs anything theses days🙄! Just wait to the day people just dictate their messages and never write. ALs are catering for this mindset too.

[geoawareUSA9]

It seems this thread has run its course and devolved into unrelated issues.