GeoSneaking

[Guest Zuckerruebensirup]

(A discussion thread on the Travel Bug forum prompted me to pose this question. Perhaps it?s already been asked and answered*, but I?m fairly new to the Groundspeak forum, so I haven?t seen it discussed yet.)

 

I recently introduced a friend to geocaching, and although he's been enthusiastic about the activity and has found several caches, he refuses to register at the site or log his finds. (To my knowledge, he doesn?t even sign the logbook?he just enjoys "the personal satisfaction? of knowing that he found it.)

 

In my opinion, part of the fun of being a cache owner is to see how many visitors come look the cache. If people are finding caches, but not logging them, the owner has no idea how many people are actually enjoying their cache. Considering the fact that it?s free to register, I feel that it?s poor sportsmanship to participate ?on the sly?.

 

Have either of the following ideas ever been considered? (1) Require users to log on to the system before they can view any cache details; or (2) Allow an option to cache owners to choose whether a cache is "open to the public" or visible to registered users only.

 

---------

 

*Update: After reading the In Honor of Markwell thread, I saw a tip about using the Search function...and found this related discussion. While it does cover some similiar comments, I think this new discussion has also brought out some good ideas that hadn't previously been mentioned. I've appreciated everyone's input and comments.

 

[This message has been edited by Zuckerruebensirup (edited 01 March 2002).]

[Guest sbell111]

nds to be 'to each his own'. Some people will never be comfortable signing up and being 'linked' to any web-based (or real-world) organization.

 

I have heard an argument for mandatory registration to be to minimize defiled caches (and missing bugs). I'm just not sure that this would solve the problem. I have been a registered user for some time and I have a number of finds. There still would be no way to know if I defiled a cache or purloined a bug.

[Guest Zuckerruebensirup]

quote:

---

Originally posted by sbell111:

As I recall, the sentiment tends to be 'to each his own'. Some people will never be comfortable signing up and being 'linked' to any web-based (or real-world) organization.

---

 

That's fair enough. But I think the second option (to give the cache owners the choice when logging their cache) would be a good compromise. Then, those who want to be 'public friendly' could, and those who aren't comfortable with the whole world viewing their cache details could opt not to...'to each cache owner his own.'

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by sbell111:

I have heard an argument for mandatory registration to be to minimize defiled caches (and missing bugs). I'm just not sure that this would solve the problem. I have been a registered user for some time and I have a number of finds. There still would be no way to know if I defiled a cache or purloined a bug.

---

 

You're right, even registered users could seek out (and steal or defile) caches or travel bugs on the sly by simply choosing not to log their find. But I'm betting the percentage of incidents would go way down.

[Guest mac]

Interesting topic. You know, as much as I like to see feedback from folks who find a cache I hid, I have more respect for someone who is caching purely for the pleasure, and not one of these recent people that are so overly concerned with their statistics that they log a find on every darn page that looks interesting. I would go so far as to require a login to view cache details. This is supposed to be fun...too much regulation is not fun...it's work! Let's all try to self regulate and not add more so called rules to this. it should be fun for everyone, and not require a rigid set of tasks one must complete in order to participate.

 

Just a thought.

mac

[Guest geospotter]

I think Zuckerruebensirup's ideas are valid. I never understood why I can view any current cache but I have to log in to view an archived cache. Seems it should be the other way around. Leave old caches available for view (to garner interest in the sport), but if you want to see the current ones register and log in.

 

I also feel that those who plunder are probably doing it 'on the sly'. Requiring login to view current caches would shine a little light on them.

[Guest Zuckerruebensirup]

quote:

---

Originally posted by geospotter:

I never understood why I can view any current cache but I have to log in to view an archived cache. Seems it should be the other way around. Leave old caches available for view (to garner interest in the sport), but if you want to see the current ones register and log in.

---

 

I think that's a great idea! I like to read cache logs from areas of the country and/or world that I know I'll never be likely to visit, just to get new cache ideas for my own area. The archived logs could spark interest to new visitors, without exposing current cache details to those who don't want to bother logging in.

 

(And I'm impressed that you spelled my whole name out, too.)

 

- Zuck

[Guest geospotter]

And I didn't cut-and-paste it either!

[Guest Zuckerruebensirup]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markwell (on the Template for Travel Bugs forum):

Remember back to when you were first scoping out Geocaching.com (for me it was Feb of 2001). I would guess a universal thought process was, ?Hey! There's one of these not too far from where I am. Maybe I?ll check this out.?

 

If you didn?t have access to know that there was one in your area, I think we?d have a lot more people come to the Geocaching website and leave without going any further.

---

 

Actually, I liked the looks of geocaching enough to register before I even headed out for my first cache hunt...but perhaps if I didn't know in advance that there were some in my area, I wouldn't have. Also, I agree that many people wouldn't bother registering until they had first tried it out, and were sure they liked it...so you make a very good point.

 

I still think cache owners should have the choice to not reveal their cache details blindly to the public. Here's an idea: What if the link for showing how many caches (and their distance) from a zipcode still worked, but you couldn't view the exact coordinates (or map links) until you logged in?

[Guest martinp13]

Maybe you could show everything to "visitors" except for the lat/long. Non-registered users could still see what was available, but wouldn't get the most useful details. Granted, many caches you can find without a GPSr, but if you aren't serious enough to register, why do you need to see the lat/long?

 

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

> Martin

Magellan 330

Don't have time to program and record your shows while geocaching? Get a TiVo !

[Guest Zuckerruebensirup]

quote:

---

Originally posted by martinp13:

Maybe you could show everything to "visitors" except for the lat/long.

---

 

Yes, that's exactly what I had in mind!

 

(I'm curious what jeremy thinks of this, and how difficult it would be to do. Not like he doesn't already have a billion things on his request list, or anything. )

 

[This message has been edited by Zuckerruebensirup (edited 01 March 2002).]

[Guest BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by martinp13:

Maybe you could show everything to "visitors" except for the lat/long. Non-registered users could still see what was available, but wouldn't get the most useful details. Granted, many caches you can find without a GPSr, but if you aren't serious enough to register, why do you need to see the lat/long?

 

---

 

I like this idea, but all anybody would have to do to find out the coordinates is read the logs . . . undoubtedly, someone will have posted "better" coordinates.

[Guest VentureForth]

This thread prompted me to check on a cache of mine that hasn't been visited recently. Looks like there was a geosneaker there in the last week.

 

I don't mind.

 

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

VentureForth out to the wild, wet forest...

[Guest brokenwing]

At first I was all for the concept of forcing registration, but the more I think about it, the more I think it would be a bad move for Jeremy to do this.

 

Let me give you an example. How many of you quit using MapBlast when they started forcing everyone to register? I did, and I imagine there were lots of others like me. I think it's human nature not to give away personal information unnecessarily. I imagine that if Jeremy were to do this, the number of new players would go down, not up. How many of you would have not started playing if you would have had to register before you got a chance to see what it was all about? There are lots of folks that go on one or more cache hunts prior to registering on the site. These folks would have just clicked on to other things if they had been forced to register first. I imagine Jeremy knows this and isn't very likely to initiate such a thing.

 

Also, as has been mentioned, forcing registration would not prevent plundering. I'd guess most plundering is due to random finds, not maliciousness. Plus, there is nothing that prevents those that register from plundering a cache. If this doesn't fix the problem, why do it?

 

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

Brokenwing

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

[Guest VentureForth]

quote:

---

Originally posted by VentureForth:

This thread prompted me to check on a cache of mine that hasn't been visited recently. Looks like there was a geosneaker there in the last week.

 

I don't mind.

 

---

 

I stand corrected. I was a victim of slow watch notification. No GeoSneaker here...

 

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

VentureForth out to the wild, wet forest...

[Guest Zuckerruebensirup]

The GeoSneakers (or 'GeoLurkers', as Jeremy calls them) I speak of are the ones who don't even sign the logbook, let alone log the site.

[Guest jeremy]

I believe that the cache owner should make the decision whether someone would be forced to register to see their cache info. I know of several folks who have felt personally attacked when someone anonymous removed their cache or vandalized it in some way, so there does seem to be a need for this option.

 

I've been thinking about how to address this for a while, and will be introducing some new features that cache owners can "opt in" if they wish. But ultimately I don't feel that it is my job to enforce registrations for caches. Ultimately the cache is owned by the cache owner, and it is their right to make their own decisions.

 

Jeremy

[Guest Zuckerruebensirup]

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeremy:

I've been thinking about how to address this for a while, and will be introducing some new features that cache owners can "opt in" if they wish.

---

 

That would be awesome! (And I agree, it should be up to each individual cache owner, as opposed to forcing a restriction upon everyone. I think we'll get more caches out there if people have a choice in how they want to offer them.)

[Guest TX_Twister_Chaser]

What about a IP log for each cache, I am not a heavy Web programmer and dont know if it would be a momentus task. But if caches get plundered, get a log of the IP addresses and see if any match from others that have be destroyed.

 

Just my .02

 

TTC

[Guest Max PDOP]

I myself did my first few caches without registering. I was checking out this od activity with a borrowed gpsr, only logging my finds on the paper logbook. When I bought my own gpsr, I registered, and logged the finds on the website. I guess the lurkers don't bother me. If they get hooked, they will probably register eventually.

[Guest VentureForth]

I really don't think that registering will make any difference. You don't need a top secret background check in order to get registered. Users could lie like mad to get access to the coords. When one gets access, it would be virtually impossible to link someone viewing the pages to a culprit guilty of plundering.

 

Also, what would we do to someone caught plundering? 15 to Life? No, we'd have to slap 'em on the hand and say "Bad Cacher. No No. Don't plunder the cache."

 

Incidently, I would like to say that of the destroyed caches I've come in contact with: 2 were acts of nature (1 replaced by owner), 1 destroyed by fire caused by drunk partiers, 1 probably bulldozed by a construction company (do they build developments on public land?), 1 not returned to it's original condition by careless cachers (subsequently taken care of by well intended fellow cacher), and 2 were obviously plundered by malicious ill-intents who probably don't have a GPS anyway. Both of those were located in very public areas. Both were in parks, one not 20 feet off the trail and very easily seen by passerbys and the other in a favorite play area for 10-14 year old kids.

 

So, how many of the 7 examples listed above would benefit by cachers being required to register before seeing the coords? ZERO.

 

I think it's fine the way it is, Jeremy. If my cache gets plundered, I'll gladly scoop up the remains, archive it for posterity, and place a new one elsewhere - even if only 100 feet away.

 

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

VentureForth out to the wild, wet forest...

[Guest Zuckerruebensirup]

quote:

---

Originally posted by VentureForth:

I really don't think that registering will make any difference. ... [H]ow many of the 7 examples listed above would benefit by cachers being required to register before seeing the coords? ZERO.

---

 

The original stream of discussion that prompted my thoughts along this line was regarding the number of Travel Bugs that go AWOL. Many seem to believe it's because people don't know what to do with them...and unless you're registered you can't read the instructions, their goals, etc...or even log them out of or into a cache.

 

Perhaps the solution isn't to require registration to get the cache coordinates (although I still believe that cache owners should have the choice), but to open up the Travel Bug pages to the public.

 

Any opinions?

[Guest sbukosky]

I've thought of two levels of Geocachers. The public level and once you've made a number of finds and hides, you become elegible for "The Club". Why? Plundering is one reason but I think being able to hide a cache without having to jump through govenment hoops and limitations is another. Ranger 'Not In My Woods' is not going to do the work to be admitted to the second level of Geocaching. So, we have less government plundering. Also, some people are able to provide valuable caches that they want to share with honest Geocachers. "The Club" adds better security. I think some form of this will be developed on the regional level if not nationally.