Merit rating

May 22, 2002

I've been reading the posts about "find counts" and whether or not they are important. I am struck by the number of times the counts are used to judge an individual's opinion. Eventually it goes so far as to judge a cacher's character by their count!

Since the counts represent nothing other than the number of local caches and the amount of leisure time someone has, I would like to propose a different sort of "stat" page. One that WOULD represent something.

I'll call it "Merit Rating", but you can call it whatever you like.

I would like to see recognition (on their profile page) of anyone who --

Organized a geocaching event

Organized or took part in a trail/park clean up

Promoted geocaching in some way

Convinced a park to allow geocaching

etc.

These items ARE important to geocaching and indicate, far better, someone's character than find counts.

Comments? Suggestions

[This message was edited by geospotter on May 22, 2002 at 12:16 PM.]

May 22, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:
I've been reading the posts about "find counts" and whether or not they are important. I am struck by the number of times the counts are used to judge an individual's opinion. Eventually it gets down to judging a cacher's character!

Since the counts represent nothing other than the number of local caches and the amount of leisure time someone has, I would like to propose a different sort of "stat" page. One that WOULD represent something.

I'll call it "Merit Rating", but you can call it whatever you like.

I would like to see recognition (on their profile page) of anyone who --

+ Organized a geocaching event

+ Organized or took part in a trail/park clean up

+ Promoted geocaching in some way

+ Convinced a park to allow geocaching

+ etc.

These items ARE important to geocaching and indicate, far better, someone's character than find counts.

Comments? Suggestions?

Seems to me like a person's find count indicates only one thing - how many caches they've found. In a discussion where experience might lend weight to opinion, (such as good techniques for using a GPS to get close to the cache, or perhaps good methods for hiding or searching), I'd probably attend more carefully to the thoughts of someone with two hundred finds than the thoughts of someone with two. If someone wants to make the inference that how many rubbermaid tubs and ammo cans someone has found correlates with that person's overall worth in God's eyes, well, I won't stop them but I think they're staggeringly stupid.

Any attempt to construct a 'character' metric seems like it's just a BAD PLAN. I'm ok with people looking at my find count, but I don't see much reason why the web site should start rating people in terms of character. Are you going to downrate felons? How about serial rapists? How will you know? What about someone who's an absolute a******, kicks dogs, drowns cats, but volunteers to pick up trash in parks, does trail maintenance, and organizes event caches as a break from their career as a child molester?

I just don't get this fascination with what other people are doing. One person complains that people leave junk when they swap, another complains that some people are finding caches but not hiding any, yet another complains that some people are becoming members and diminishing the self esteem of those who don't become members. Now, we have to start rating a geocacher's character? Why?

Geez, Louise. For once, can't we just have this be nothing more serious than hiding and finding caches? Why does it have to be a high stakes experiment in social engineering, for crying out loud?

May 22, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Kodak's4:
... I think they're staggeringly stupid ... it's just a BAD PLAN ... How about serial rapists? ... an absolute %&@hole ... kicks dogs ... drowns cats ... career as a child molester ... Geez, Louise ... for crying out loud?

Take it easy, man. It's just a discussion here.

May 22, 2002

I don't believe that the finds count has anything to do with character, but I do think it indicates experience. I place more value in an opinion from someone that has 2 or 3 hundred "legitimate" finds than someone that has 10 or 20 simply because they have considerably more experience that myself in geocaching, wich is what this site is all about(or should be for the most part). So I guess, what I just said shouldn't really matter that much to a lot of people here , even though I have done two of the items on your list and am working on the other two.

May 22, 2002

I don't believe that the finds count has anything to do with character, but I do think it indicates experience. I place more value in an opinion from someone that has 2 or 3 hundred "legitimate" finds than someone that has 10 or 20 simply because they have considerably more experience that myself in geocaching, wich is what this site is all about(or should be for the most part). So I guess, what I just said shouldn't really matter that much to a lot of people here , even though I have done two of the items on your list and am working on the other two.

May 22, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Kodak's4:

Any attempt to construct a 'character' metric seems like it's just a BAD PLAN. I'm ok with people looking at my find count, but I don't see much reason why the web site should start rating people in terms of character. Are you going to downrate felons? How about serial rapists? How will you know? What about someone who's an absolute a******, kicks dogs, drowns cats, but volunteers to pick up trash in parks, does trail maintenance, and organizes event caches as a break from their career as a child molester?

I agree. My point wasn't to rate cachers' character, but to recognize those that give back to the sport in some way or go the extra mile so that we all get more enjoyment from this sport. I re-read my original post and could see how you might read it that way, so I have edited it (sorry for any confusion).

May 22, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Kodak's4:
Oh, for Pete's sake. Can't it just be a rubbermaid tub under a log? (followed by an unusually rude rant)

Good god, what the heck did you have for breakfast today?

If all you want to do is play with your rubbermaid under a log then what on earth are you even reading this forum for?

There are some here that believe that Geocaching has not yet met its full potential. For them, discussing it, and thinking of ways of improving it are important. The sport is a truly a community effort, not only among the Geocaching community, but also the community at large - particularly when it comes to using public lands. Any suggestions that promote goodwill among ourselves, and the community at large, can only help to achieve the favourable impression that we should be trying to make. Without doing so, it would be easy for the few jerks among us to ruin it for the rest.

If you didn't know, this forum is for discussing issues relating to Geocaching. If you don't believe there are any don't participate. If you think someone's idea is dumb, then say so, (hopefully along with a meaningful argument and with more tact and diplomacy than you have shown) but don't berate them merely for raising an issue or making a suggestion that you disagree with.

You may not agree with what I say, but I will defend, to your death, my right to say it!(it's a Joke, OK!)

3k · May 22, 2002

Why can't anybody just be happy knowing they did something good? Do we really need recognition for every little good deed accomplished?

I can see it now:

1st person: "I did more good things for geocaching than you did."

2nd person: "Maybe, but mine were of higher quality than yours."

May 23, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:

I would like to see recognition (on their profile page) of anyone who --

+ Organized a geocaching event

+ Organized or took part in a trail/park clean up

+ Promoted geocaching in some way

+ Convinced a park to allow geocaching

+ etc.

These items ARE important to geocaching and indicate, far better, someone's character than find counts.

Comments? Suggestions

Fon't forget the 'My Dad can beat up your Dad' section.

MajBach

You can't have everything,where would you put it?

May 23, 2002

My two cents:

I dont think Kodak's post was rude, just exasperated and I can't say I blame him at all.

IT'S JUST A GAME PEOPLE.

Please don't turn it into a lifestyle choice or a philosophy for living...

Why do we always take a fun thing and squeeze every last drop of fun out of it with organizing, rules and b**ching?

Everywhere you go, there ya be..."

May 23, 2002

How about a character rating based on how many people you can piss-off with a single forum post?

Charlie

"One should never begin a journey by heading in the wrong direction."

May 23, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by LarsThorwald:
How about a character rating based on how many people you can piss-off with a single forum post?

Charlie

I don't know if I would win, but I am sure I would be in the running!

You may not agree with what I say, but I will defend, to your death, my right to say it!(it's a Joke, OK!)

May 23, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by LarsThorwald:
How about a character rating based on how many people you can piss-off with a single forum post?

Charlie

I don't know if I would win, but I am sure I would be in the running!

You may not agree with what I say, but I will defend, to your death, my right to say it!(it's a Joke, OK!)

May 23, 2002

Seneca, thanks for the support. It's nice to see that others also see that geocaching can be more than "Tupperware under a log".

I am reminded of my nephew. He's a professional snowboarder. He was snowboarding when many ski areas banned snowboarding on their slopes. That's probably news to any newbie snowboarders who assume that snowboarding has always been allowed. While his friend just wanted to "ride", my nephew had a bigger view of snowboarding. He designed new types of bindings and started his own company. Today he travels the world doing what he loves most ("riding" - all expenses paid), owns a multi-national company (his father works for HIM), and he's only in his mid-twenties. And snowboarding is an Olympic event! His friend who only wanted to "ride" still works at Burger King (or somewhere) and can only ride on winter weekends. Now, I'm not looking to form a company or anything (mine is doing just fine, thank you), but I love geocaching so I think a lot about its future.

quote:
ITS JUST A GAME PEOPLE

That's true. And as long as it is "only a game", National Parks, et al, will view it with suspicious eyes. The National Park Service doesn't play games.

So what does this all have to do with my original post?

During a recent meeting with some park officials I mentioned "Cache In / Trash Out" and park clean ups, and was asked to give some examples....I couldn't....That info doesn't exist. I suggested that they go to the website; some were noted there. But, since I didn't have the info, and they weren't interested in searching for it on some website, the point was completed lost on them. And therein lies the problem.

To convince officials that parks should be open to geocaching we must first sell the idea to them. Without info, stats, etc. we can't sell it. If we can't sell it, it is not in their interest to allow it.

So what do we do?...We need to have that info available. When a geocacher organizes a park clean up it needs to be noted somewhere. When a geocacher gets a park to allow geocaching it needs to be noted somewhere. Whenever a geocacher does ANYTHING that might impress park officials it should be noted somewhere. If I had been able to pull out a listing of geocachers that had been recognized for having organized a park clean up, I am sure that it would have had an effect on their decision. As it is, with no info, they'll "think about it."

The Boy Scouts do it with Merit Badges. If the Boy Scouts only "played games" they wouldn't be where they are today. Now, "we don't need no stinkin' badges", but a minor addition to the database would allow us to note such items.

Part two...

As far as "more finds equals more experience". I must respectfully disagree. After you have successfully found eight or ten caches there really isn't anything more to learn. Enter the coordinates, follow the arrow, look under the log. It's pretty simple. Checkers is more complicated. Someone who has found 300 caches is no more experienced than someone who has found 50. It's just the same experience repeated. That's why I think geocaching is so popular, it's easy to learn and the benefits far outweigh the costs.

And finally...

I am not, at all, interested in rating a cacher's character. It disturbs me that a cacher's character enters into any discussion. What I am interested in, is seeing geocaching remain, grow, and be widely accepted by park officials. But without data, it's a hard sell.

[This message was edited by geospotter on May 23, 2002 at 06:54 PM.]

May 23, 2002

I think that we must agree to disagree. Someone that has 300 finds by definition has more experience than someone with 50, and there are many caches out there that require much more effort and thought than looking under a log. I have been on caches that required me to use trig functions, poetry, and simultaneous equations with multiple unknowns to locate the next waypoint-slightly more complicated than checkers I believe. My point however, is that someone with 300 finds has probably been on this forum for a lot longer than I have and has heard a lot of these topics before-more experience-and I bet that they have seen a lot of caches that require a lot more thought and creativity than I have as well.

"We don't know one millionth of one percent about anything." Thomas Edison

3k · May 23, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:
Part two...

As far as "more finds equals more experience". I must respectfully disagree. After you have successfully found eight or ten caches there really isn't anything more to learn. Enter the coordinates, follow the arrow, look under the log. It's pretty simple. Checkers is more complicated. Someone who has found 300 caches is no more experienced than someone who has found 50. It's just the same experience repeated.

When/If you make it to even 50 finds, and have accomplished a few caching adventures of greater difficulty, let us know if you still feel that way.

You're right that many cache hunts conclude with the actual find having been a repeated experience. Through repeated behavior the cacher becomes more efficient; probably also a bit more observant.

It may come as a surprise to you, but people have come up with methods of hiding caches that are considerably more sophisticated or challenging than your "look under log" example.

3k · May 23, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:
Part two...

As far as "more finds equals more experience". I must respectfully disagree. After you have successfully found eight or ten caches there really isn't anything more to learn. Enter the coordinates, follow the arrow, look under the log. It's pretty simple. Checkers is more complicated. Someone who has found 300 caches is no more experienced than someone who has found 50. It's just the same experience repeated.

When/If you make it to even 50 finds, and have accomplished a few caching adventures of greater difficulty, let us know if you still feel that way.

You're right that many cache hunts conclude with the actual find having been a repeated experience. Through repeated behavior the cacher becomes more efficient; probably also a bit more observant.

It may come as a surprise to you, but people have come up with methods of hiding caches that are considerably more sophisticated or challenging than your "look under log" example.

May 24, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by niskibum:
...there are many caches out there that require much more effort and thought than looking under a log. I have been on caches that required me to use trig functions, poetry, and simultaneous equations with multiple unknowns to locate the next waypoint-slightly more complicated than checkers I believe.

True (though some checker players may disagree). But that is "solving puzzles". Once solved, it's back to "enter coordinates," etc. If you have found 300 caches that require you to solve puzzles I would respect your ability to solve puzzles, but finding the cache is a repeated experience. The assumption made with find counts is that more caches means more learning. I don't feel that that is the case after a certain number of finds.

My MENSA cache (waiting for permission) involves problem solving. I think you'd like it.

BP, I will get to 50. It's just a matter of time and travel. Most caches in my area require long travel times. But I'll get there. If you like I will bump this thread when I do. As far as more challenging caches -- I think ice climbing to a cache in the dead of winter qualifies.

The "log" comment was a metaphor, not meant to be taken literally.

While we may disagree on these points I do appreciate your responses. And niskibum, I forgot to commend you on the 2 of the 4 items that you have accomplished on my initial list suggestion. I, myself, have only completed 1, but I am working on the others.

3k · May 24, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:

BP ... Most caches in my area require long travel times. ... As far as more challenging caches -- I think ice climbing to a cache in the dead of winter qualifies.

Let's see ... the list shows 530 caches within 100 miles of your first find. Not bad!

I agree, that ice climbing sounds like it must have been lots of fun, but your earlier post didn't cover getting to the cache, only finding it. Was the actual find a new or repeated experience ... was it under the metaphorical "log?"

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on May 24, 2002 at 08:24 AM.]

3k · May 24, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:

BP ... Most caches in my area require long travel times. ... As far as more challenging caches -- I think ice climbing to a cache in the dead of winter qualifies.

Let's see ... the list shows 530 caches within 100 miles of your first find. Not bad!

I agree, that ice climbing sounds like it must have been lots of fun, but your earlier post didn't cover getting to the cache, only finding it. Was the actual find a new or repeated experience ... was it under the metaphorical "log?"

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on May 24, 2002 at 08:24 AM.]

May 24, 2002

Finding it was easy. Getting to it was much harder.

You can check out my log here.

May 24, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by MajBach:Fon't forget the 'My Dad can beat up your Dad' section.

......or the "My hockey team can beat yours" section.....LOL

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

"Whad'ya mean you didn't save the location of the truck?..EEEK!!!..."

May 24, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by MajBach:Fon't forget the 'My Dad can beat up your Dad' section.

......or the "My hockey team can beat yours" section.....LOL

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

"Whad'ya mean you didn't save the location of the truck?..EEEK!!!..."

Merit rating

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

Join the conversation