Approvers and FTF

2.1k · October 22, 2003

Tough nuts, indeed. So, since the suggestions thread is closed, I figured I'd open this one.

Approvers getting FTF because they clicked "approve" and then ran out the door: perk of the "job" or abuse of knowledge?

--

http://healinghearts.freeservers.com/pandee.html

2.3k · October 22, 2003

From Atlanta to B'ham in time to beat one of us to a cache? That'd be some impressive driving for mtn-man.

Wow... my reply is just as pointless as this topic!

Joel (joefrog)

"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for ye are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!"

October 22, 2003

Has this actually been a problem for anyone?

Are any approvers actually doing this?

Do you yourself have any thoughts on the subject or are you just starting a thread on it for the sake of starting a thread on it? It just strikes me as odd that you would start a thread on something you see as an issue and not make any comments on it either way yourself.

If an approver was rushing out and being FTF on every cache they approved I'd say it would be a problem. But if it's not happening this just strikes me as yet another non-issue.

________________________

What is caches precious?

2.1k · October 22, 2003

How can they be FTF, they are so busy approving.....

I somewhat agree that they shouldn't be a FTF on a cache they approve. Actually who really cares about the FTF. Of course if they are doing it to cash in on a great FTF prize then shame on them.

We've done one FTF and it was matter of luck as we had just come in from caching and saw this one posted and within a few miles from home, so off we went after it and found it first. No big deal. There was no grand prize for it or anything. I guess it could matter more to others than some.

Brian

www.woodsters.com

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

October 22, 2003

I'd like to think that our approvers have a more mature attitude than that, and would not do something so obviously improper. If you have an example, though, you should share it.

--

Scott Johnson (ScottJ)

October 22, 2003

I have yet to hear of an example of an approver taking advantage of the system for a FTF.

Probably be hard pressed to find such a case.

I think Ju66l3r just likes to hear himself complain.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have never been lost. Been awful confused for a few days, but never lost!

N61.12.041 W149.43.734

3.8k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Has this actually been a problem for anyone?

Are any approvers actually doing this?

No, I do not consider it a problem.

Yes, an approver has been the FTF on 2 of my caches. I reiterate; No, I do not consider it a problem.

==============="If it feels good...do it"================

**(the other 9 out of 10 voices in my head say: "Don't do it.")**

.

October 22, 2003

The only scenario I can think of that would really upset me is if I were to put out a cache whose coordinates were based on solving a puzzle or visiting multiple other caches in order to get the coordinates. In this case, the approver would already have the coordinates and could just go get the loot.

"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose."- Jim Elliot

Texas Geocaching

9.4k · October 22, 2003

Not a problem here, since 9key is on the other side of Texas from me and CO_Admin is at about 6-8 hours away driving. I'm not against having approvers wait 24-48 hours before searching for it, but I've not had a problem with the honor system to this point.

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

3k · October 22, 2003

As stated above, I don't see why this is an issue and have yet to see an example of this one way or another, abuse or not.

I don't think that it can be an issue if nobody can cite a specific instance where its been a problem.

MiGO

__________________________

Caching with a clue....

October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:
Approvers getting FTF because they clicked "approve" and then ran out the door: perk of the "job" or abuse of knowledge?

Well, since you haven't even placed a cache yet, what does it matter to you. Why start a thread just to stir up controversy? If you have an example where this is a big problem or has done someone harm, then state it!

Unless there is a first finders prize, there seems to be no reason why an approver can't run out and be the first. The only competition about being a FTF is in the eyes of the person who thinks this is important. Being first to a cache doesn't make you any better or more skilled than the second or 100th finder.

___________________________________

Moondog3.com - Portland Geocaching

21.9k · October 22, 2003

The approvers asked this question of Jeremy quite a long time ago, and were told that it was OK to be FTF. Jeremy has said this in the forums this week.

Notwithstanding that, each approver follows a personal code of ethics on being FTF and it is an issue that we discuss amongst ourselves when a concern arises. In most if not all cases, we follow a more restrictive rule than what the owner of this website has told us we can do.

I have been FTF on seven caches since I became an approver. Three of them were at event caches quite some distance away from my home. Two of those were found as part of a group, and the third was available to everyone along with a number of other caches and I chose the new one because I had done all the others.

My fourth FTF was accidental. I approved the cache on a Wednesday and waited 48 hours until seeking it out on Friday evening after work. It turned out that the cache owner, a first-time hider, did not actually place the geocache prior to it being approved. I ran into him at the cache site just after he hid the cache. I found his cache, 90 feet away from the posted coordinates, and he corrected his cache page.

My fifth FTF was also on a newbie's first hide. The cache had gone unfound for days, despite being a 1/1 in an easily accessible community park. When I found it, the coordinates were off by 80 feet, and the cache was on the opposite side of the endless poison ivy patch. The cache owner thanked me and edited her page. A flood of finders followed.

My sixth FTF took place on a Friday evening for a cache approved on a Thursday. It was hunted at that time due to personal scheduling considerations, the details of which are too sad and boring for publication here.

My seventh FTF took place 24 hours after the cache was approved. It was another first-time hide and I had a concern about the cache. I passed up a valuable first finders prize in the cache, took a dollar item and left a three dollar item.

Prior to becoming an approver, I had a reputation for being first finder on fifty percent or so of the new caches within my part of the state. Now, I normally wait 48 hours or more before even thinking about searching for a new cache. I have asked on my local geocaching organization's site whether they have any problems with the way I've conducted myself since I became an approver. If any concerns are identified I will post them here.

|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|

Keystone Approver, Geocaching.com Admin

"Eschewing Entropy and Ensuring Enthalpy in the Groundspeak Forums"

9.4k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Navdog:
Being first to a cache doesn't make you any better or more skilled than the second or 100th finder.

The first finder doesn't usually have a trail that goes right to the cache.

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

October 22, 2003

Navdog said:

"The only competition about being a FTF is in the eyes of the person who thinks this is important."

Amen to that!

3.9k · October 22, 2003

I haven't had this problem. Then again my approver is in NJ and I'm in Long Island NY. If he comes out here to get a FTF I'll be impressed. I know I could never be an approver, I care too much about being the FTF, so I wouldn't be able to trust myself.

Can anyone come up with any instance that they can say an approver took advantage of this situation? If not this topic should be killed.

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

Because now I am Lost.

2.1k · October 22, 2003

Sorry, Ash, didn't have time to sit and post a bit ago when I started the topic.

As for maturity of approvers, I don't know, it would seem that it has been a problem for some (go back to the suggestions for approvers thread to figure out who had examples).

Also, just because some/all of the current approvers are not doing this does not necessarily mean it should not be a guideline (to prevent similar abuse in the future). I am sure I am not the first person with some sort of handbook that has rules in it that when you read them you go "Wow...who'd ever do *that*?"...but the rule is there just the same because it's an explicit statement of what is not allowed (whether you, I, or other would do it or not).

Now, with those minor details out of the way, here is my view:

Approvers have decided to take the local onus of what is a valid cache. This gives them a number of "behind-the-scenes" details about the cache that provides a fairly distinct advantage in finding the caches in their area. If they are interested in being the FTF on a cache, they will certainly be more able than the next person for two specific reasons. One, they have the background scoop and may have already gotten some details on the specific location (as we all know, it's not just a pair of coordinates). This is an advantage if it were a footrace from the car situation...which probably does not happen often unless the cache itself is highly publicized and contains a good prize for the FTF (e.g., the Magellan saga).

The second problem is that caches when approved are nearly instantaneously placed on the website. But there is nothing that instantaneously notifies a finder that a cache was just approved. Therefore, in terms of just having the challenge of being the FTF, the approver has a huge advantage unless someone is sitting at their computer clicking refresh on the search page every minute or so. While this is a contrived problem (only applicable to those who would see FTFs as a badge of honor or statistical enhancement), there are a good number of people who enjoy this aspect of the game. These people probably make it a habit of checking for new caches in their area about once a day. This would mean a minimum of 24 hrs lag period for the approver after approval would allow this challenging aspect of the game to continue for those interested. Having a rule to this accord provides 2 things: a statement on the part of GS that lets cachers know that approvers will not ruin this aspect of the game and that if you want to be an approver, you will have to give up a great deal of the FTF in your area and settle for only those that someone has not beaten you to in 24 hours.

Some approvers have made it clear that they would already be working under this guideline were it in place today. Those who are not currently working under this guideline would have to weigh their desire to be FTF with their desire to be approver and decide. Those that would become approvers later would know exactly what it entailed.

I don't see a problem with implementing this rule/guideline for approvers.

--

http://healinghearts.freeservers.com/pandee.html

24.7k · October 22, 2003

It falls under the same area as approving your own cache.

Do they have a higher responsibility, or do you have to pony up a perk just to get people to do the job?

October 22, 2003

Good form would say that approvers should not approve their own caches or get a FTF on one they approved.

Would just be a wise thing to avoid accusations. Just like a company hiring an outside accounting firm to go over the books.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have never been lost. Been awful confused for a few days, but never lost!

N61.12.041 W149.43.734

4.8k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Keystone Approver:
The approvers asked this question of Jeremy quite a long time ago, and were told that it was OK to be FTF. Jeremy has said this in the forums this week.

Boy, nothing like beating them over the heads with facts My head is numb enough. Like the posts above, I say: Problem, what problem

Be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them. The rest go geocaching.

October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:
Sorry, Ash, didn't have time to sit and post a bit ago when I started the topic.

Stuff

I don't see a problem with implementing this rule/guideline for approvers.

Glad to see you did have your own point of view on it! All seem fairly valid points to me.

For my personal view it's another one of those things where I agree in part, I don't see a problem implementing it as a rule or guideline, but I also don't see a problem with it not being implemented and things carrying on as much as they are now.

My personal preference would be for any problems arising from this to be dealt with internally on a case by case basis rather than the creation of rules to counter any specific transgression. I think on the whole approvers do a pretty good job and I wouldn't begrudge them an occasional FTF now and then if that's what they want.

________________________

What is caches precious?

October 22, 2003

Did I miss something? Did Jeremy declare this week as "Pick on the approvers" week? Why is everybody suddenly on the approvers' case? Or maybe it is "Whine your heads off" week?

2.1k · October 22, 2003

I think the problem was stated in another thread that is now closed. Can't remember what it was or even if there was a problem. I really don't care about that. If it happens and becomes a problem, then people will simply stop putting first finder prizes in them. I know I would, but my approvers are over 1000 miles away.

Brian

www.woodsters.com

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

October 22, 2003

I enjoy the extra challenge of being FTF, particularly at night, not to beat other cachers to the cache, so much as hunting before any kinks have been worked out.

In my area I have seen an approver be FTF a few times, but I don't know if that approver was the one who approved those particular caches, and I don't really care.

I think it's great, and a small, deserved perk.

___________________________________________________________

If trees could scream, would we still cut them down?

Well, maybe if they screamed all the time, for no reason.

Click here for my Geocaching pictures and Here (newest)

2.1k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by many:
Can _anyone_ come up with any instance that they can say an approver took advantage of this situation? If not this topic should be killed.

For those who hold this view, I think you need to consider 2 things about what is at discussion here. One, just because you don't want to discuss it, does not only mean you don't have to read it, but it also does not mean that no one else should be able to post about the topic at hand. Secondly, and more pertinent to the specific topic at-hand, guidelines/rules are NOT solely built to outlaw activities that have been witnessed and protested. Often, guidelines and rules are drawn up to prevent forseeable situations from occuring in the future. If we are giving suggestions to laying out a specific set of guidelines for approvers, some people have felt this would be a valuable addition (as per the number of posts in suggestions to approvers thread on this topic). It is best to make any and all changes to the guidelines at the same time, so as to prevent the problem for approvers of getting new/different rules every 2-4 months as new problems occur and requiring that they figure out what the current rules are for them to abide by.

Again, if they are already abiding by an internal set of rules for playing more fairly than the rules even allow for, then all the better for them and the people in their area. These rules will be setup to determine the bounds in which approvers CAN act. The question in your mind should be CAN an approver use their advance knowledge of a cache's placement to be FTF? It seems fairly across the board that multi/puzzle caches would be no-no's. I also feel traditional and all other caches should be included (a - to simplify the rule for approvers and b - to allow those finders who enjoy the thrill of being FTF a fighting chance since they do not have the advanced knowledge of when the cache will be posted by the approver).

--

http://healinghearts.freeservers.com/pandee.html

October 22, 2003

This is not an issue.

That Quack Cacher:

Lone Duck

When you don't know where you're going, every road will take you there.

7.2k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Renegade Knight:
It falls under the same area as approving your own cache.

Do they have a higher responsibility, or do you have to pony up a perk just to get people to do the job?

Is this what I need to get me to do this -- not hardly. I do this just because I love geocaching. Boy, look at what I get in return. It is still worth it though. The responses from the majority far outweigh the grief from the minority.

quote:
Originally posted by ChiefPig:
Did I miss something? Did Jeremy declare this week as "Pick on the approvers" week? Why is everybody suddenly on the approvers' case? Or maybe it is "Whine your heads off" week?

Not Jeremy, but just a handful of cachers. I will express my sincere thanks to all out there who have supported the approvers.

mtn-man... admin brick mason

"approver of all trades" -- per Woodsters Outdoors

October 22, 2003

quote:
The second problem is that caches when approved are nearly instantaneously placed on the website. But there is nothing that instantaneously notifies a finder that a cache was just approved. Therefore, in terms of just having the challenge of being the FTF, the approver has a huge advantage unless someone is sitting at their computer clicking refresh on the search page every minute or so.

Wanna know about caches FIRST??? Sign up here.

For the last cache I put out, I got the e-mail from Skydiver announcing my cache BEFORE I got the e-mail from GC.com telling me my cache was approved.

Got e-mail? Then you've got the new caches "first".

"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose."- Jim Elliot

Texas Geocaching

2.1k · October 22, 2003

ju66l3r I agree about being practive. I also agree about rules and guidelines as my entire career has resulted around both. As they say "it's all fun till someone gets hurt". Same goes here. People tend to think it's ok if it hasn't happened yet. Just as Fed government didn't think about a plane going into a high rise or their own building for that matter. What did they do? They hired movie script writers to make up scenarios that could happen. They wanted the creativity of others there to help make them better prepared. When you have a handful of people playing a game, unwritten rules are fine. When you have hundreds of thousands, it's not fine. When the guidelines are left wide open to be interpreted in different ways and then not even touch on some things, it's a matter for disaster.

I don't know if anyone here works for the state of georgia or has worked for them before. I did for 8 years. They operate on a similar fashion or at least the agencies I worked for. There's no rule against until it happens and a law suit has come out of it or someone was seriously injured or killed. Sadly it's true. Hopefully it won't get to that extreme here.

All I can do is offer suggestions from those experiences that may make it better and function better. I know that other places I worked at that were more proactive were better places. People knew what they could and couldn't do. They knew their limits and abided by them for the most part.

A FTF by an approver is not against the rules. Is it an integrity issue? For some yes, for others, no. Just don't place FTF prizes in the caches if it does bother you.

Brian

www.woodsters.com

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

3.9k · October 22, 2003

quote:
just because you don't want to discuss it, does not only mean you don't have to read it, but it also does not mean that no one else should be able to post about the topic at hand.

I didn't mean to imply that the topic was not worthy of discussion. My bad. And you're right, just because it's not general practice right now, it may become an issue at some time.

Like I said FTF's for me are a big part of the game. I in fact check for new caches in my area a few times a day, and have been known to drive 30, 40, 50 minutes to grab one. If an approver we're to go grab a FTF before I had a chance the even see the cache that might burn me a little. If it happened continually it would burn me a lot. But by making the approver wait 24 hours to go find a cache doesn't that put the approver at an unfair disadvantage? In some area's waiting 24 hour's would virtually insure the approver would never get a FTF.

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

Because now I am Lost.

9.4k · October 22, 2003

Woodsters, quit placing the cart before the horse. Has there been a need to make a rule regulating approvers and FTF's? NO! No one has documented one single incident involving approvers abusing their position to get the FTF on any cache. Let's see, there are nearly 100,000 caches to date and not one of them has a FTF log by an approver because they used their power wrongly. Get over it. This thread should be closed.

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by umc:
I don't think that it can be an issue if nobody can cite a specific instance where its been a problem.

That's what I thought.

Unfortunately, the reason no one can cite a specific example (if I'm to believe what I'm hearing) is that the people who CAN cite such examples have been banned from posting for a while.

So much for that "mature attitude" I was alluding to earlier ... and remember in another thread when I mentioned that the admins are sometimes a little guilty of allowing their buttons to be pushed, and descending to the same level as the instigators? Case in point.

*sigh*

PS - I don't personally CARE if an admin gets FTF on a cache, so long as he didn't use his position as admin to his advantage -- going straight to the end of a multi, for example, or hitting it either before or immediately after it's posted. There are no extra points for FTF anyway, so who suffers? Let's be up front about it, though ... honesty never hurt, did it? Well, only when my wife asks if her butt looks big.

--

Scott Johnson (ScottJ)

October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:
ju66l3r I agree about being practive. I also agree about rules and guidelines as my entire career has resulted around both. As they say "it's all fun till someone gets hurt". Same goes here. People tend to think it's ok if it hasn't happened yet. Just as Fed government didn't think about a plane going into a high rise or their own building for that matter...._

There are two sides to that argument though. The world is a dangerous place. If we were to make proactive rules against everything that could go wrong we would lose a lot of freedoms. There needs to be a sensible balance between the two.

The balance between individual freedom and personal responsibility on the one hand and state enforced rules to protect you on the other is one of the most fundamental of all political debates. Not something I'm an expert in in any way shape or form though and a bit beyond the scope of the matter at hand.... interesting subject though if only there was a forum topics that didn't really belong here

There are few people here who seem to switch back and forwards between loving rules and hating rules depending on whose freedom these rules would impact on

________________________

What is caches precious?

2.1k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Team GPSaxophone:
Woodsters, quit placing the cart before the horse. Has there been a need to make a rule regulating approvers and FTF's? NO! No one has documented one single incident involving approvers abusing their position to get the FTF on any cache. Let's see, there are nearly 100,000 caches to date and not one of them has a FTF log by an approver because they used their power wrongly. Get over it. This thread should be closed.

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

I never did say that sax, I said it didn't bother me, but just because it never has happened doens't mean it doesn't need to be dealt with.

Brian

www.woodsters.com

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Lone Duck:
This is not an issue.

Maybe not for you or your locality. It is for the Vancouver area. A couple weeks ago I did my morning search for new caches close by and came up empty. 1 hour later I searched again and came up with a new cache that already had the FTF logged. It was logged by a local cacher localy known to be an approver. Maybe a coincidence?

When I related this story to another cacher they told me that they had gone for a FTF on a different cache a few weeks previously. They found the log book already signed by the same local cacher. It was signed with a date and time that would not occur for another few hours.

Of course, this is all circumstantial and hearsay, but raises enough doubts in my mind that I believe it IS a valid topic and concern even though there is not enough evidence to lodge a formal complaint with TPTB.

I have two new caches already hidden but have not yet posted them to GC because they have relatively valuable (over $35) FTF prizes in them. I am currently loathe to list them for the reasons stated above.

Now that we've been told our local concerns are "tough nuts", I am now considering what other options I have - either list them on NC where they will have relatively low visibility, removing the FTF prizes, or pulling them out and not bother with hiding caches at all.

BTW - Glad to hear that everything in your part of the world is working great. That's what we would like here, too.

____________

Gorak

I love frogs. They taste like chicken. Yum.

9.4k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:
I never did say that sax, I said it didn't bother me, but just because it never has happened doens't mean it doesn't need to be dealt with.

It doesn't need to be dealt with because it hasn't happened and maybe never will.

Do you need to legislate everything?

Someone could drink too much water and throw off their electrolyte balance and die. Let's make a rule that you can't drink too much water.

Someone could take too big of a bite of their food and choke on it. Let's make a rule that you must chew your food all the way.

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

3.9k · October 22, 2003

OK Gorak says it IS a problem in his area. Let's say for argument sake that it starts to become an issue in other area's. What should be done about it? I think we can all agree that 'tough nuts' is not the right attitude and frankly I'm surprised by that remark. I think 24 hours is too long a period of time. If TexasGeocaching can have an option that gives 1st alerts to people who want them, why can't GC.com? With that in place once the alerts go out the cache is fair game for anyone. I'm just throwing stuff out here, maybe it could be as simple as say 3 hours after the cache is approved. Any other viable solutions to a problem that for the majority of us is not really a problem?

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

Because now I am Lost.

October 22, 2003

Approvers being FTF is a different topic than an approver abusing their position as an approver. The example Gorak mentions is not at an approver being FTF on a cache but an approver using their approver role to gain an unfair advantage on the community. Situations where they have abused their role should be reported to Groundspeak.

Geocachers become approvers, because they love the game, the challenges, the hunt. They became involved for the same reasons as you. Because of their enjoyment of the sport they have chosen to volunteer their time as an approver. They enjoy a puzzle cache so in many cases they pass off the approval responsibility of to another approver, so they can enjoy the puzzle experience for themselves. They approve hundreds of caches near their homes, and they all have few FTF. They volunteer countless hours to the community replying to emails and looking at cache listings. They all have have far less time to dedicate to cache hunting than they would like, let alone being able to get out to be first to a cache.

hydee

I work for the frog

Please don't throw sand when playing in the sandbox!

October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by hydee:
Approvers being FTF is a different topic than an approver abusing their position as an approver.

I'm not attempting to throw sand in the sandbox but... huh? Isn't the discussion about an approver being the first to find all about an approver abusing their position as an approver?

Or are you saying that the topics of 1) approvers abusing the WAY they approve caches, and 2) approvers using their "approver knowledge" to be the FTF are two different topics?

Personally, I think the conversations go hand in hand.

Pan

Fact is that there is nothing out there you can't do,

Yeah, even Santa Claus believes in you...

Floyd of Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem, from "Can You Picture That?"

2.1k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Team GPSaxophone:
It doesn't need to be dealt with because it hasn't happened and maybe never will.

Have you really checked through all of the caches listed on this website since approvers were used to determine that an approver has not abused their knowledge of a cache to be FTF? If not, then please don't throw out absolutes such as "has not happened". As for "maybe never will"...maybe it might.

quote:
Do you need to legislate everything?
Someone could drink too much water and throw off their electrolyte balance and die. Let's make a rule that you can't drink too much water.

Someone could take too big of a bite of their food and choke on it. Let's make a rule that you must chew your food all the way.

Personal responsibilty is not at issue here, therefore these analogies are inappropriate. While many approvers have posted here to explain that they are not FTF for personal as well as practical reasons (and I thank them for that...posting as well as behaving), we are discussing whether at the most base level an approver should be (not have been, not will do so) able to use their advance knowledge to their advantage. Most people here can agree that they should not and therefore designing a rule to that effect lets everyone know that that is a base level requirement to continue being an approver and for new approvers. Remember, there are plenty of people who enjoy being approvers without the desire to use it to be FTF. Any approver who would not be able to live with this guideline could probably be replaced without much effort. Doing so would allow that person to return to the FTF that they enjoy without upsetting the others in their area and it would mean others in the area would be able to FTF again on equal footing.

Personally, I live in an area where the FTF is often a guy who runs trails and doesn't use a GPS but still gets to the cache hours after it is posted...and he's not even an approver! I have beaten him once...came close a second time. It's a fun challenge but if he were an approver and getting there in half of his current time because of it, it would no longer be fun, but annoying.

Protection from abuse of the system is what the guidelines are about. Not protection from abusing yourself. A more appropriate analogy would be if I were calling BINGO and wrote my own card as I drew the numbered balls so that I would always win over the rest of the crowd who are left more to chance with their pre-made cards.

I am interested in skydiver's applet though...I wonder how often it checks for new caches.

--

http://healinghearts.freeservers.com/pandee.html

1.3k · October 22, 2003

First of all, do any of you want your caches being approved by someone who does not participate in the sport of geocaching?

That would be one sure way to avoid the percieved "problem" with approvers getting FTF. I, for one, want my caches approved by an experienced cacher that can provide guidance and suggestions to make it fit the guidelines.

In this very thread, and another that probably spawned it, you read posts from approvers that state that they do indeed wait to give others a chance to get FTF. If we can trust them to approve our caches fairly, we can trust their judgement as to how long to wait before setting out to find a cache. If you can't trust them, you have a lot more to worry about than who's finding the newest cache first.

In addition, it has been mantioned that approvers have "inside information" that enables them to have an advantage hunting a cache that they have approved personally. It has also been stated in a recent thread that approvers who like the looks of a cache might pass it on to a different approver in order to avoid spoiling the experience of the hunt.

Even if an approver leaves to go find a cache the instant it is listed, that doesn't guarantee they will get there first. Look at the race for the Magellan caches, it all boils down to proximity. In addition, if an approver just listed a cache, chances are they are approving caches and it would be reasonable to assume they are too busy doing so to jump up and go caching.

So, yes approvers are cachers and have as much a right to hunt them whenever it is convenient as anyone else. If that means they get there first, good for them.

[This message was edited by Bloencustoms on March 32, 1999 at 25:60 PM]

October 22, 2003

quote:
huh? Isn't the discussion about an approver being the first to find all about an approver abusing their position as an approver?

No, it is not the same thing.

I believe an approver can be FTF on a cache and have it be fair.

But, if an approver were to go log a cache then come home to approve it, then that is an abuse. If an approver were to use extra info given to them during the approval process to ensure they could log a cache first, that is an abuse. Abuse issues need to be dealt with, but this thread is not the channel to address those issues.

hydee

I work for the frog

Please don't throw sand when playing in the sandbox!

October 22, 2003

Just an idea while wading through these forums,

How about the approver approves the cache (duh!) but the cache owner has the power as to when to post it. Strategic timing could make for some interesting senario's.

2.1k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by hydee:
Abuse issues need to be dealt with, but this thread is not the channel to address those issues.

No, you closed that thread. Can I assume that a guideline for approvers not using information gained in the approval process is in the works now? Accepted or not, is it at least one of the things gleaned from the "suggestions" thread?

Often, when people are asked for suggestions/brainstorming, the results are outlined in a summary so that people know that their specific idea was collected among the others (or if something they thought was covered was missed, it can be added later). There was no summary, the thread was simply closed. What, if anything, was gathered from the suggestions thread or was it simply placebic?

Since as many of the GS/GC faithful have stated over and over again, this is a community-driven game...it would be nice if the procedures of the listing service monopolistically used by the community were a bit more transparent.

--

http://healinghearts.freeservers.com/pandee.html

3k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ChiefPig:
Did I miss something? Did Jeremy declare this week as "Pick on the approvers" week? Why is everybody suddenly on the approvers' case? Or maybe it is "Whine your heads off" week?

Its one of the two, I don't remember which. I will need to go through my email and re-read the memo.

MiGO

__________________________

Caching with a clue....

October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by eroyd:
Just an idea while wading through these forums,

How about the approver approves the cache (duh!) but the cache owner has the power as to _when_ to post it. Strategic timing could make for some interesting senario's.

Like Bloencustoms said, that is a great Idea. I really hope that ends up being the way it's done.

___________________________________________________________

If trees could scream, would we still cut them down?

Well, maybe if they screamed all the time, for no reason.

Click here for my Geocaching pictures and Here (newest)

October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by eroyd:
Just an idea while wading through these forums,

How about the approver approves the cache (duh!) but the cache owner has the power as to _when_ to post it. Strategic timing could make for some interesting senario's.

That is a fabulous idea! That solves the problem for both players and approvers.

____________

Gorak

I love frogs. They taste like chicken. Yum.

2.1k · October 22, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Bloencustoms:

quote:
Originally posted by eroyd:
Just an idea while wading through these forums,

How about the approver approves the cache (duh!) but the cache owner has the power as to _when_ to post it. Strategic timing could make for some interesting senario's.

I think that's a fantastic idea! It will allow people to submit their caches for approval before placing the container, reduce geolitter on disapproved caches that aren't recovered, and allow approvers to continue to go for FTF's without all of the whining. This idea deserves it's own thread.

[This message was edited by Bloencustoms on March 32, 1999 at 25:60 PM]

I marked this post with the alert function!

...so that someone responsible for the forum and the website would have to read it!

--

http://healinghearts.freeservers.com/pandee.html

2.1k · October 22, 2003

quote:
As many are now saying:
Like Bloencustoms said, that is a great Idea. I really hope that ends up being the way it's done.

...and to think that people wanted to shut this thread down!?! The nerve!

--

http://healinghearts.freeservers.com/pandee.html

1.4k · October 24, 2003

I agree with eroyds suggestion -- it's a good one.

*****

2.1k · October 24, 2003

Welcome back Jomarac5.

No everything doesn't need to be legislated. But we are talking about a game and games have rules. As I stated, I really don't care about FTF's, but there are some out there that do. Someone brought up the issue of a problem that more than likely is happening or is perceived as happening. I don't think there is an issue of an approver approving caches and then decides he's going out to cache and so happens to be a firs finder. I think it more or less of a thing of where as soon as he/she approves one and then runs out the door after it. Kind of like push the button and out the door. Of course there could be issues as Hydee pointed out where the approver is logging the find then approving it and that is outright abuse.It would be difficult to prove that an approver was doing the push and run, unless it was continously happening and within a short period of it getting approved.

Brian

www.woodsters.com

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Approvers and FTF

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment