Poll - Find Counts

[+Rebel]

I've seen a lot of back and forth on the boards about how many finds this group has, how many of a person's finds are virtual, locationless, etc. I've seen people making judgements about other people based upon what is little real information.

 

I'd like to see a feature where the user has the ability to block others from seeing their find counts. Something on the line of a simple box to check to make them visible (the default being hidden.)

 

Whatcha think?

 

-----------

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." - Mark Twain

[Steak N Eggs]

I say keep them public. I like to see people complain/brag/whine about their "score".

Geocaching, where the forums are made up and the POINTS don't matter.....

 

"My gps say's it RIGHT HERE".

http://www.geogadgets.com

[+Renegade Knight]

What's up with your vote tags. "Keep them public I like to snoop" is my closest option, but it's not about the snooping, I don't fit your tag any more than you would fit this one. "Keep them private I'm a whiner"

 

As it happens I like the find totals for my state and town. People don't have to have the highest totals in the nation to lead a catagory. If they can't be highest in the state they can be highest in the area and so on.

[+georgeandmary]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Da Rebel:

I've seen a lot of back and forth on the boards about how many finds this group has, how many of a person's finds are virtual, locationless, etc. I've seen people making judgements about other people based upon what is little real information.

 

---

 

I like seeing find counts. What's wrong with them. I also like seeing how long people have been members. Should that info be hidden also?

 

george

 

Remember: Half the people you meet are below average.

[+georgeandmary]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Da Rebel:

I've seen people making judgements about other people based upon what is little real information.

 

---

 

Only 31 finds? Maybe you shouldn't allowed to post polls until you have a higher find count.

 

george

 

Remember: Half the people you meet are below average.

[+georgeandmary]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Da Rebel:

I've seen people making judgements about other people based upon what is little real information.

 

---

 

Only 31 finds? Maybe you shouldn't allowed to post polls until you have a higher find count.

 

george

 

Remember: Half the people you meet are below average.

[+ClayJar]

Since this has been covered so long the trees have grown through it, I'm simply going to express my extreme distaste as seeing it yet again and let someone who cares enough post links to the previous seven bazillion threads.

[+Rebel]

Only 31?

 

15 of those are virtual, and 16 are locationless, I worked for them, baby!

 

-----------

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." - Mark Twain

[+Rebel]

Only 31?

 

15 of those are virtual, and 16 are locationless, I worked for them, baby!

 

-----------

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." - Mark Twain

[CourtneyP]

I guess the only reason I look at find numbers is to gauge how experienced a geocacher is. It seems to help me most when I am looking at a potential cache to visit, and the cacher to place it has a higher find number. Even still, this is a minor factor.

 

Otherwise, it's fairly useless to me, personally. People that use them as ego boosts... eh, whatever.