Jump to content

Moratorium on Locationless Caches


Jeremy
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

Due to the gray area of the Locationless cache, and the lack of a good way to handle locationless caches today, should we have a moratorium on locationless caches until a system can be put in place to address them?

 

We need a 2/3 majority vote to create a moratorium on locationless caches. Keep in mind it would be temporary and become available again for posting in April/May. Both sides can plead their case if they so choose.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

The votes will go on for one week and the decision will be made then.

 

My opinion for the moratorium:

 

The volunteer approvers are already bogged down with physical caches, and continually are under attack when they turn down a locationless cache. Considering how grey the guidelines can be, it is very difficult to approve/disapprove these caches. Also, considering that anyone can post a locationless cache at a whim with no preparation, it becomes far too easy to post these whenever it tickles a person's fancy.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

I agree with all your points.

 

I've never yet gone out to find a locationless. If they never came back, I wouldn't be upset. They don't require much preparation, and they generate a lot of traffic in front of traditionals that people have worked hard to create.

 

The current rules are pretty comprehensive. Improving on them will be difficult. Did you have specific ideas on how you might improve on them?

 

--------

trippy1976 - Team KKF2A

Saving geocaches - one golf ball at a time.

Flat_MiGeo_A88.gif

Link to comment

I did a few locationless caches for the first time last week because all the caches I plan to visit in my area were under snow. I picked some that sounded interesting and I had a fun time doing them. My first choice will always be physical caches but when I don't have the time to drive far away to look for physical caches it’s nice to have other types of caches. On the other hand if locationless caches are becoming a problem for the system than I would discontinue new ones and encourage the placement of physical caches.

 

Lake Tahoe Geocacher

Link to comment

I voted to suspend locationless. It's not that I dislike the locationless concept, to the contrary I like the idea... but to me, it's not geocaching.

 

I like the idea of going out to locate some object, or special place... but that's not what a geocache is.

 

I'm a purist. If locationless had their own category I'd probaby go out and hunt for a couple myself. As it is now, I feel that a found-it log on a locationless would only be a stain on my geocaching identity.

 

Jamie

Link to comment

I voted for Temporarily suspend new locationless caches.

 

Having said that, I have to admit that I've done 5 to date, even the dreaded 'yellow Jeep' but I posted 2 pics. one of a new jeep and the other of a old CJ5 in 2 different places and it took my 5 days to find an older one. I went this route to a) make the locationless a little more interesting to do and b)there were few pictures of older Jeeps so it also made the find slightly different.

 

I find the locationless to be a bit of an enigma, sometimes they can be 'lame' but others can let you see places or things in the world that you may never get to. But it comes down to how much work one is willing to put into 'finding' the cache. I also think that can be said for all types of caches and the cachers who hide and find them.

 

The other point is that in some places cachers may be limited in the amount of caches near their home and locationless caches still allow them to participate until the cache count climbs within their 100 mile circle.

 

I understand it is a burden on the people who approve the caches and I also understand the loathing that some cachers hold for these type but there still are people who like them and I hope that they won't be canceled permently.

 

Boy this fence is hard on the butt.... icon_rolleyes.gif

 

We live on a rock, ergo we rockcrawl.......

Link to comment

That seems most appropriate, Jeremy. I was going to say something like "I've never had an interest in locationless, just like I've never had an interest in benchmarking."

 

I think it /does/ deserve its own category. It'll finally make the lives of those of us who choose not to seek them easier.

 

Will they still be in pocket queries? Any plans to add benchmarks to them? Are they there already? Am I blind? icon_smile.gif

 

--------

trippy1976 - Team KKF2A

Saving geocaches - one golf ball at a time.

Flat_MiGeo_A88.gif

Link to comment

We really enjoy locationless caches (and even have two of our own) but I vote to suspend new ones until the new system is in place. No need to work the approvers any harder than they already are. I think it's a great idea to make them into their own category, like benchmarks.

 

--Marky

"All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer with a backlit GPSr"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Z:

I voted to suspend locationless. It's not that I dislike the locationless concept, to the contrary I like the idea... but to me, it's not geocaching.

 

I like the idea of going out to locate some object, or special place... but that's not what a geocache is.

 

I'm a purist. If locationless had their own category I'd probaby go out and hunt for a couple myself. As it is now, I feel that a found-it log on a locationless would only be a stain on my _geocaching_ identity.

 

Jamie


Yeah, what Jamie said. I like them too. If I had a digital camera, I would probably do more of them, but in my opinion they aren't geocaches, and the ones I do now I log as a note. If they had a separate catagory like the benchmarks, I would probably log more of them as finds.

 

Tae-Kwon-Leap is not a path to a door, but a road leading forever towards the horizon.

Link to comment

I'm one of the tiny minority who says do not suspend locationless.

 

I do like the idea of handling locationless more like benchmarks instead of as a normal cache and I admit I did log one locationless. I find it to be an interesting concept and a good excuse to keep a camera and gps with me in my travels.

 

It's a great way to say "Hey! That'd be a good picture for ............ locationless cache."

 

I didn't see any mention that they're causing any real problems but of course, I don't know the behind the scenes effort to keep track of them.

 

"The hardest thing to find is something that's not there!"

Link to comment

I go with Jeremy and what seems the majority on this. I am a Newbie, but it seems reasonable if the man in charge says he needs this.

Is this the vote here, or do I actually VOTE some where else. I hope it is not a locationless place.

 

I have flouted the wild, I have followed its lure, fearless. familar, alone; yet the wild must win,

and a day will come when I shall be overthrown. By: Robert Service

Link to comment

Dang it wake up Dersu!

I found where to vote, it is early here. Getting ready for work @ 0600 and trying to Geocache on the puter at the same time.

 

I have flouted the wild, I have followed its lure, fearless. familar, alone; yet the wild must win,

and a day will come when I shall be overthrown. By: Robert Service

Link to comment

It makes perfect sense that locationless have their own categories. If anything, I think it will even encourage their activity. It will be another "activity" involving a GPS. Maybe it could even be "re-birthed" with a better name for the theme - maybe like "photocaching." icon_biggrin.gif I sorta like that, and it would certainly have a direct appeal to "photography buffs."

 

Anyway, it's not like the man is asking for a burial vote. icon_wink.gif Just a temporary pull so the buttons can be polished a bit. icon_biggrin.gif

 

If you hide it, they will come.

Grandmaster Cache

Tank at: FISH WHISPERER'S LAGOON

Link to comment

I'm also one of the tiny minority who says do not suspend locationless.

 

I voted so because for those geocachers in areas where is very few normal caches, the locationless caches are very important reason to continue this hobby.

 

Please do not say that "hey, place more regular ones", as i've done that already and i want to search something for a while...

 

Regards,

 

70242_1300.gif

Link to comment

I think both sides of the locationless debate will be happy with a new system, so if it will speed up the process, I say place the moratorium.

 

quote:
Maybe it could even be "re-birthed" with a better name for the theme - maybe like "photocaching."

GPS - Global Photo Shoot

I agree, I think people will be more likely to contribute to locationlesses (they're definitely not caches once they're in a separate system, right?) once the stigma is removed. Also, a new system will allow them to have their own form, which could include the much-needed searchable Subject field (that is my speculation, so don't hold Jeremy to that until he's said so).

 

Flat_MiGeo_B88.gif

Mein Vater war ein Wandersmann, und ich hab' auch im Blut

 

[This message was edited by Dinoprophet on February 10, 2003 at 05:47 AM.]

Link to comment

I voted to Temporarily suspend new locationless caches. I've never logged one and have no intentions of ever doing it. On the other hand locationless caches are a great way to get the handicapped into the game. Therefore I like the idea of separating them much like benchmarking and Grandmaster Cache came up with a great name for the new area. PHOTOCACHING sounds great and describes it perfectly.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Captain_Morgan&Family:

I'm also one of the tiny minority who says do not suspend locationless.

 

I voted so because for those geocachers in areas where is very few normal caches, the locationless caches are very important reason to continue this hobby.

http://img.Groundspeak.com/user/70242_1300.gif


Capt n' Family ...but an improved system would benefit all types. Couldn't you hunt those that are out there already and plan some great ones for the reopening in the mean time?

 

Jeremy... you'd better hold tight to that April/May date, I can imagine how those with few caches in the vacinity would depend on these to play the game...puts the pressure on. I definitely say go for it though.

Link to comment

I believe it is a different category. I agree with all who say it's not the same as a geocache. It shouldn't be abolished, but should have it's own category, like benchmarking does. I have been tempted to do one or two, but haven't yet, and if I did I would log it as a posted note. I wouldn't count it as a find, it isn't the same. Although, I think it could be fun.

 

Cache you later,

Planet

 

"You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and the dog will

give you a look that says, 'My God, you're right! I never would've thought of that!'" - Dave Barry

 

[This message was edited by Planet on February 10, 2003 at 05:57 AM.]

Link to comment

I voted to suspend them. I like the new section.

 

icon_mad.gifI actually saw a thread in another forum where one user requested people from other cities to send him a picture of a stop sign so he can post a locationless cache to artificially raise his number of hidden caches.

 

That's just silly and annoying!

 

kc

row, row, row your boat

Link to comment

I voted to suspend the locationless for a while but I and my wife truley enjoy them as well as the regular caches! We have seen some neat places and some have been fun hunting for...almost like a scavenger hunt! Let it have its own area and I vote on the Photocaching name also...that was good!

 

Darkmoon icon_biggrin.gif

 

All you have to do to fly is throw yourself at the ground and miss!

Link to comment

I voted to suspend. I did it only because you said it is a huge workload on the cache approvers. I support anything that makes a volunteers job easier.

 

HOWEVER....

 

I am assuming that the ones currently active will remain so? It would be a shame to suspend them all. Am I correct in assuming that you mean to suspend only approving any new ones?

 

Thank you sir for all your hard work. I maintain several gun club web pages as a volunteer, and it is tough enough. And they are NOTHING like this site.

 

Mike. Desert_Warrior (aka KD9KC).

El Paso, Texas.

 

Citizens of this land may own guns. Not to threaten their neighbors, but to ensure themselves of liberty and freedom.

 

They are not assault weapons anymore... they are HOMELAND DEFENSE WEAPONS!

Link to comment

Locationless caches are an entirely different game than "hide and find the cache". It has the potential of being a good game, and some people (a minority on this site) do really enjoy them. Suspend them and let those who enjoy them develop a new site dedicated to the "locationless cache".

 

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.

geol4.JPG

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Tubby Rower:

I actually saw a thread in another forum where one user requested people from other cities to send him a picture of a stop sign so he can post a locationless cache to artificially raise his number of hidden caches.

 

That's just silly and annoying!


You mean this one? No, actually, it's just silly. Annoying would be if Dru meant it. icon_wink.gif

 

Flat_MiGeo_B88.gif

Mein Vater war ein Wandersmann, und ich hab' auch im Blut

Link to comment

I voted to suspend. At first I was going to vote not to suspend, because although I rarely do locationless, I don't mind them continuing for others who enjoy them.

 

However, when Jeremy said they were bogged down with approvals, and locationless could contribute to the delay of an approval in my area... PFT! DOWN WITH LOCATIONLESS!

 

I'll take an actual specified hunt over a locationless any day.

 

Pan

 

Cachito ergo sum. I Geocache, therefore I am.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Irish:

 

We need a 2/3 majority vote to create a moratorium on locationless caches.


 

Jeremy, why is 2/3 needed? If this is your site, can't you be unilateral?

 

What qualifies a person to vote? Charter membership? What prevents a person from creating a bunch of logins and voting under each one?

 

FWIW, I also think locationless should be a separate section. I voted to suspend, hoping that the suspension would move the site towards having a separate locationless section.

 

migo_sig_logo.jpg

Link to comment

First, let me say that I belong to many forums and this is the first time I've seen the owner put something up for a vote!! Bravo. I greatly appreciate the gesture.

 

I'm fairly new at the whole geocaching thing. I like the idea of locationless (and I assume virtual) caches. There are alot of things in my state and in NYC I wouldn't have known about if not for the caches listed here. I'm watching all of them and plan to go soon.

 

However, I agree that a new system similar to benchmarking would be a good idea. And I like the name Photocaching as well.

 

I would like to see them stay in some form or another.

 

Thanks.

 

The great question...which I have not been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is "What does a woman want?" --Freud

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Desert_Warrior:

I voted to suspend. I did it only because you said it is a huge workload on the cache approvers. I support anything that makes a volunteers job easier.

 

Thank you sir for all your hard work.

 

Mike. Desert_Warrior (aka KD9KC).

El Paso, Texas.


 

Couldn't have said it better myself. I do notice a tendency fo those not interested in locationless to assume they are in the "majority" when basically the truth is it is the "majority" of individuals that post to these forums that express that opinion. IMHO there are a LOT of cache hunters who do not bother to post as it is not that friendly of an environment, especially for the newbies.

 

That said, I like solid, conventional caches best, followed by virtuals, then locationless (I"m not into benchmark hunting yet, but you don't see me bad mouthing that activity or anyone that pursues it). If I was going to hunt caches on any given weekend or holiday I'd research any conventional caches available in the area I"m going to be in and follow that up with any virtuals. The main locationless types I like are those that have a limited number of possibilities, such as one that calls for the listing of battleships, or a certain type of aircraft for instance. In both instances there are a very limited number of them left in the world and only so many people will be able to log a find before it is too late.

 

On the other hand, I logged the Yellow Jeep locationless mainly because I was peeved at the attitude toward it in the forums, so it is kind of a "protest find." I know, I got over it, but it just seems there are a lot of people out there that think their idea of what GeoCaching should be is the only idea, rather than a part of an overall activity that fits many varied purposes for different people.

 

The idea of putting locationless caches into their own category had a great deal of merit, I'd pursue them in their own right just as I would benchmarks if I ever got an interest in that.

 

Like Mike said, Jeremy your hard work on all this is greatly appreciated.

 

"Trade up, trade even, or don't trade!!!" My philosophy of life.

Link to comment

HI Jeremy we appreciate the oppurtunity to voice our opinion on this issue. I guess I am one of the few who do locationless caches. They have actually caused us to do some quite extensive searches for submarine memorials where there are only one in each state or a statue where there are only 110 in existence, but I also can see some lame, no thought caches. I think a seperate catergory would be fine and tighter restricrions on placement. Also it might be helpful to put certain days of the week for submittal when normal caches usually run lower or an explanation of why this would be a unique ie only 110 in existence type requirent for submital something to make the prep work a little more in depth.

the federation

Link to comment

Caches are just like the movie title.

 

Locationless caches do have their merit, even though I don't have a camera to search for them at the present. I would like to do some in the future. The locationless Caches that the Cacher Anton from the Salt City are really neat. What a way to build a data base of knowledge for your students.

 

So for now temporarily suspend them and when a easier way to verify the caches comes available.

Reinstate them under a separate Category.

 

Tahosa - Dweller of the Mountain Tops.

Link to comment

I can see how the moratorium will temporarily help relieve strain on the system, but please explain how segregating the locationless caches will have any effect on this problem.

 

Also, in my experience, the generalization that locationless caches take less effort to set up doesn't hold true. I know that it is popular to cite the same one or two locationless caches on the forums to support this claim, but the guidelines have already been changed to address these. I have been to several traditional caches that seem to have been dropped off by opening the car door. Generalizing to entire group doesn't make sense in either case.

 

Lastly, I'm sure if the guidelines for traditional caches were as stringently enforced as those for the locationless type, the ensuing attacks would paralyze the system in a day.

 

Can anyone seriously say that the issues with locationless caches pose as great a threat to geocaching as the ongoing conflict with park managers restricting or banning caches traditional caches? These problems generally occur after caches are found that were placed without permission, or because of a negative impression due to irresponsible cache placement in other parks, yet the guidelines clearly state that permission needs to be obtained before placing caches on private land. Likewise, the guidelines state that the managing agencies should be contacted before placing caches on public lands.

 

GoBucks

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Tubby Rower:

I'm pretty new to the forums here and I figured that he was being serious. In any case, someone else who just gets giddy about their numbers being bigger than someone else might see it and really do it.


No problem, no offense meant, and welcome. Unfortunately, people *do* try to get that kind of stuff by. Luckily, when they do, we usually get some very amusing sarcastic threads like that one.

 

Flat_MiGeo_B88.gif

Mein Vater war ein Wandersmann, und ich hab' auch im Blut

Link to comment

I love to watch locationless caches! They take me to places all over the world in quest of beautiful and unusual things. I am attempting to log some as well, which makes me keep my eyes open to my surroundings, even if I have passed by them every day of the year. Please keep them, segregated if necessary.

Thanks, cachewidow

Link to comment

This is less a discussion about the merit of locationless caches. This is more of an open admission that the site is not set up for them. Creating a moratorium will help remove some of the pressure that approvers have, which ultimately reduces stress and opens up some time to make solutions that will address this issue.

 

I will admit there are some merits to locationless caches, so they aren't going away. If anything I'm working on ways to enhance them.

 

To answer another question, the current locationless caches will not go away. I'll probably add a note at the top of the locationless cache section so people know there is a moratorium if it passes.

 

And yes, I could raise the almighty admin axe and make decisions, but I acknowledge that when the community speaks, I must listen.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

Offer up the locationless to anybody who wants to start another website and wash your hands of the whole thing. It's not in the realm of what geocaching ever was supposed to be. I feel the same for virtuals but there are many who love these. That's the answer to the question you didn't ask.

 

For the one you did, go ahead and have your moratorium. The volunteers are working hard enough, unless there are clear guidelines on what to approve and what to not, the (regular) cache approval process grinds along too slowly. Seth! and Moun10bike work pretty hard and are still conscientious. Fuzzy guidelines serve only to hamstring the approval volunteers.

 

EDIT: Typo

 

http://fp1.centurytel.net/Criminal_Page/

Link to comment

Thanks for clearing that up Jeremy. There are several people that have been vocal about locationless caches (usually negative). Tracy and I have done some, and most were interesting, and required some work (or luck) to find and log.

 

I am perplexed by people refusing to even try a locationless cache. Yes, it's a choice to try it or not, but as far as "pure geocaching", do not multicaches, virtuals, and webcam caches also fall outside of that realm, or are these types of caches variations on the original idea?

 

I do think they deserve a separate area. I don't know if we'll do anymore, but they are a variation on the Geocaching theme.

 

Richard

Link to comment

I voted to "Temporarily suspend new locationless caches."

 

I have not done any and I do not know if I ever will.

 

But that is my choice, for now.

 

And it is others choice to do them. To each his own.

 

My thought on it is, what other option is there then to spin off the locationless and sometime soon even the virtuals ? Spin them off or throw them out.

 

And as there will be one big stink if they get thrown out and maybe a lot of people will go somewhere else.

 

I would think the log counts for those items will also be listed on the " My Cache Page " like the benchmarks are now.

 

Just some of my thoughts on it.

 

TTFRN, logscaler

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Team Tecmage (R&T):

I am perplexed by people refusing to even try a locationless cache. Yes, it's a choice to try it or not, but as far as "pure geocaching", do not multicaches, virtuals, and webcam caches also fall outside of that realm, or are these types of caches variations on the original idea?


 

I'd say that multicaches are a variation on the original idea, since they still involve one or more physical caches. icon_wink.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Dinoprophet:

Another question: will new approvers be available for the new system? How will putting them in a different system ease the load on the approvers?

 

http://www.mi-geocaching.org/

Mein Vater war ein Wandersmann, und ich hab' auch im Blut


 

I agree. It would seem that knowing how the proposed change would have an effect would be helpful to anyone making an informed vote.

Link to comment

I would vote to eliminate them from the game entirely if that were ever contemplated. They just aren't very fun/challenging/enhancing. So I can find a skatepark, or some other random place and I can remember to photograph my GPS unit at the place or the secret code to claim a find. Whoopee.

 

Locationless caches just aren't much fun. Since this is a game that we do for entertainment, having fun is the reason for doing this, or any game. For me, LC's just don't cut it.

 

By appointment to the Court of HRM Queen Mikki I.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Irish:

Creating a moratorium will help remove some of the pressure that approvers have, which ultimately reduces stress and opens up some time to make solutions that will address this issue.

 

And yes, I could raise the almighty admin axe and make decisions, but I acknowledge that when the community speaks, I must listen.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location


 

Besides, we are going to need all the approvers we can get, between the glut of new cachers, and the fact that Spring is on the way. I'm sure people will be getting out there soon and placing new caches when the weather warms up. icon_biggrin.gif

 

Cache you later,

Planet

 

"You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and the dog will

give you a look that says, 'My God, you're right! I never would've thought of that!'" - Dave Barry

Link to comment

I've done one locationless, but I didn't inhale icon_wink.gif. Virtuals pose no problem of "geocaching ethics" for me: you have to actually GO somewhere, the cache is always in the same spot, and you need a GPS to find your way. The fact that I don't have to root around looking for a physically hidden object once I'm there doesn't detract from the experience IMHO. The opportunity to check out a new spot or learn something is on par, entertainment-wise, with finally locating that elusive 35mm film can or tupperware. Therein lies my problem with locationless caches - all too often you don't need a GPS and you don't HAVE to travel somewhere. On average, I would guess that the effort to rack up 100 locationless finds is significantly less than is required for 100 traditional/virtual finds, yet they are all considered equal as "finds". So spin them off - great idea.

Link to comment

Jeremy you've been negative about locationless since they've started. I enjoy the heck out of them. You are asking for a 2/3 vote here. So what if it's 100% against locationless? Few users actually post here. You won't get 1% of the total cachers voting.

 

You say that the main reason is the backlog of caches awaiting approval. Yet you have lots of people volunteering to help with that.

 

I can't stand multi stage caches. Hate them. So I'm fine with ignoring them. The locationless caches give me something else to do with my gps. It keeps me awake. I find them interesting.

 

I don't care about numbers. I do this for fun. If you are going to drop them then do you have any suggestions where us locationless lovers can go?

 

I hear voices.....and they don't like you!

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...