Jump to content

Opinions wanted... Is a reserved FTF cheesy or not?


Mark 42

Recommended Posts

The cahe at the URL below has a reserved FTF.

 

I thought that was a bit cheesey, but didn't want ta make waves (the person is also a really good cache approver, and I would like to get a new cache approved again in the next few weeks...)

 

But when my Wife used the exact same word, I had to comment.

 

What do y'all think?

Here's the URL:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?pf=&ID=100915&decrypt=y&log=

Link to comment

It might be if FTF is actually important to anybody. I myself have no problem with it. One cacher having a little bit of fun with a friend - its no big deal. I can't see how its going to detract from anyone else's pleasure. I think though, it would have been nicer if it were just a request, with no threat of deleting finds of persons who didn't respect the request. Would have been interesting to see how such a request would have been honoured by the locals.

 

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

Link to comment

I think it is totally idiotic. And the fact that they would delete others finds if logged? What a piece of crap the cache creator is.

 

And the funny thing?? The tool that the cache was made for can't even find it! ROFLMFAO.

 

Hey, here is a clue, if you are going to put a private cache for your buds, do it on your own time. It takes a ton of nerve to say you are going to delete finds because and your buddy want to play around.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by OuttaHand:

If he was so concerned about his friend being the FTF, he should just give that person the coords before it's approved and let him find it...


 

This was probably the most equitable way to handle it. It would actually give the best odds of an actual FTF as opposed to a FT Online Log and 3rd in the physical log book. Still it's their cache and so their rules.

 

Quite the story on the cache page though.

Link to comment

I think its more than cheezy - its downright rude to threaten to delete log entries before a specific person found it. If I were in the area I would go find it anyway and sign the log book just to make a point. If this particular approver didn't want anyone else to find it before his friend he should never have listed it.

 

Here's an idea, hide a cache and make a rule that if a particular approver finds it that the log entry will be deleted. Of course, since he is the approver it likely it wouldn't be approved. icon_wink.gif

 

____________

Gorak

 

I love frogs. They taste like chicken. Yum.

 

"Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been passionate, rebellious, and immature." --Tom Robbins

Link to comment

Ignoring the cache itself. Is a reserved FTF the kind of rule we really want as a community? My money is on no.

 

A policy should be something along the lines of "as long any geocacher has the ability to meet the rules for a rules cache, it will be aproved" This would rule out reserved FTF caches and a few others we don't need to list (and who the people who don't mind this one would agree should not be listed). Geocaching so far is a non exclusive community. Anyone can join up and start geocaching. Is there a reason to break ground in the other direction?

Link to comment

Seems rather elitist to me.

 

I'd be of the mind not to do the cache at all. Ever.

 

Perhaps for my next cache, I'll stipulate that only someone who writes nice things about me and my cache can log the cache as a FTF. But it'll have to be something really, really nice otherwise the log will be toasted.

 

*****

Link to comment

Since this is my cache let me answer the question.

 

The intended FTF is TravisL. He is a well respected local cacher who has some of the best no find logs I've ever read. He actually jokes about being the FTNF (first to NOT find) on caches. This was intended to be a cache that would produce some of those notorious No Found logs. I figured it would be more fun if we had a bunch of people watching the cache putting additional pressure on TravisL to actually find it.

 

I suppose I could change the wording a bit. I cannot stop someone from finding this cache. But I am asking that people hold off on logging their find online. If I know Travis, he will be out searching for this cache during every lunch and after work until he finds it. If it goes past a few days I'll open it up for others to log.

 

Wander Lost

 

smile.gif I hope you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you've heard is not what I meant. --Richard Nixon

 

Washington State Geocaching Assn.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by OuttaHand:

If he was so concerned about his friend being the FTF, he should just give that person the coords before it's approved and let him find it. Then once it's approved, he can make his log. I think once it's approved and listed, it's fair game.


 

Bingo!

quote:
Originally posted by Starship Trooper:

Actually, if the owner is requiring the friend to log every skunk in the meantime - it could be pretty fun to watch.


 

No, that's just cruel.

Link to comment

This happened in MI a few weeks ago. I won't put the cache down but it's a good example of what gets your goat. A new cache came out and before any one had a chance to find it some one logged it, thing was the coordinated were wrong. no one else could find it. The owner changed the coordinates and every one else could find it. question is how did the FTF find it with the wrong coordinates? Interesting question.

 

Treat every CACHE you find..... .like it's Yours !!!

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Wander Lost:

Since this is my cache let me answer the question.

 

The intended FTF is TravisL. He is a well respected local cacher ...


Your intentions may have been good, but you blew it. You are not playing fair, and as a result, both you and he are now LESS respected by many of your fellow cachers.

 

To borrow from your last quote:

I'm sure your reasons for your actions appear justified in your own sight, but I hope you realize many of us believe the concept of "reserved FTF" to be patently unfair and threats to delete legitimate finds as anathema.

 

I hope you'll reconsider your stance.

 

worldtraveler

 

[This message was edited by worldtraveler on November 04, 2003 at 12:19 PM.]

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Wander Lost:

Since this is my cache let me answer the question.

 

The intended FTF is TravisL. He is a well respected local cacher who has some of the best no find logs I've ever read. He actually jokes about being the FTNF (first to NOT find) on caches. This was intended to be a cache that would produce some of those notorious No Found logs. I figured it would be more fun if we had a bunch of people watching the cache putting additional pressure on TravisL to actually find it.

 

I suppose I could change the wording a bit. I cannot stop someone from finding this cache. But I am asking that people hold off on logging their find online. If I know Travis, he will be out searching for this cache during every lunch and after work until he finds it. If it goes past a few days I'll open it up for others to log.

 

Wander Lost

 

smile.gif I hope you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you've heard is not what I meant. --Richard Nixon

 

http://www.geocachingwa.org


 

I had a feeling this was the reasoning behind the "reservation". Having had the pleasure of meeting Mr. TravisL at a cache event over the summer, and having heard the jokes about his DNF's I have to agree that this was a rather funny idea.

 

I also think that anyone in the area that has met Travis or read his posts will think this is rather entertaining as well. I can see why the rest of the forum members sounded a bit disgruntled by the idea though.

 

From reading the notes posted on the site, it looks like martmann is the only one that got the joke.

 

Hopefully Travis can put together a find on this cache soon so that we don't have to worry about all this. My interest in this cache is a bit higher now though. Unfortunately I don't get out to that area very often. Maybe I'll make a special trip and camp next to the cache until Travis shows up icon_wink.gif

 

"Sometimes you are a very large fool Perrin Aybara. Quite often in fact." Annoura Sedai (Book Nine of The WoT)

Link to comment

"I had a feeling this was the reasoning behind the "reservation". Having had the pleasure of meeting Mr. TravisL at a cache event over the summer, and having heard the jokes about his DNF's I have to agree that this was a rather funny idea."

 

Since when does being the Mickey Spillane of the logbook entitle you to have such special powers and importance. For some reason, the more I read this thread and read all the blaa blaa about being a funny log writer, all I can picture is that skit from Saturday Night Live with Chris Farley as Matt Foley inspirational speaker. He asks David Spades character what he wanted to be when he grew up, and he says" I wanna be a writer". Farley lifts his glasses and says "Gee, cant tell dad, is that Bill Shakespear sitting there?"

 

My point being, such exceptions should NOT be made for people. If you want to do this kinda thing, give him the coords and have him find it BEFORE (being the optimal word) you get approval for it. It will save many a tounge lashing!

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Bull Moose:

Isn't the point of a first to find that you beat the other people there fair and square?


Bingo.

I think it would have been better to email TravisL the minute it went online, and just put something in the description like "Let's see how many DNFs TravisL can log before this one is found".

 

I saw it, called my wife so she could take our kids (my son is a HUGE bionicle fan) to go be FTF on it.

 

At one point I put a link to "Bionicle the Movie", and the link got editted out.

 

After that, using some keyword searches for some names & terms in the cache description I found an even more direct link.

 

I still have no idea how to find the cache, or if the incorrect cache coords given are a starting place, or totally unrelated. But that part is fine... we all have the same clues and the same chance of finding it.

 

I have one pseudo FTF that I still don't consider a true FTF, and I'm trying to actually do a fair & square FTF.

 

No harm, no foul though.

Maybe a "Only Mark 42 can be FTF" would make up for it... (Just kidding).

 

"I'm not Responsible... just ask my wife, She'll confirm it"

Link to comment

I think the biggest problem (and what your seeing in the reaction from people, like myself, outside of the TravisL "inner circle") is that this is an inside joke that's being undertaken somewhat at the general public's expense (of not being allowed to find/log the cache).

 

To anyone not in the Washington area or those in the WA area who don't read up on all of Travis' posts, the fact that you're willing to delete anything else before Travis actually finds the stupid thing is a bit of an affront to having it publicly listed. There is little reason (especially since you're given the ability to approve your own cache) not to play your game with Travis and then actually put the cache up and let him put all his logs in and then open it to everyone.

 

By listing the cache here, you've basically stated "come and get it" but to then say "wait wait wait, let's see Travis be a fool for a bit first" is just sorta weak.

 

Then again, tomorrow is just another day.

 

--

 

The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than

the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one.

-George Bernard Shaw

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:

To anyone not in the Washington area or those in the WA area who don't read up on all of Travis' posts, the fact that you're willing to delete anything else before Travis actually finds the stupid thing is a bit of an affront to having it publicly listed. There is little reason (especially since you're given the ability to approve your own cache) not to play your game with Travis and then actually put the cache up and let him put all his logs in and then open it to everyone.


 

Another good reason why approvers should not be permitted to approve their own caches.

 

____________

Gorak

 

I love frogs. They taste like chicken. Yum.

 

"Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been passionate, rebellious, and immature." --Tom Robbins

Link to comment

Yes, TravisL has logged the find. I have changed all the text on the page to remove any reference to a reserved FTF.

 

I'm not perfect, I'm human. I had an idea to do something I thought would be fun for the local community, it failed. The subject of this thread is no longer an issue so let's chalk this up to a lesson learned and be done with it.

 

Wander Lost

 

smile.gif I hope you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you've heard is not what I meant. --Richard Nixon

 

Washington State Geocaching Assn.

Link to comment

For the record, WanderLost discussed this idea with other approvers (including myself) prior to posting the cache. We do this regularly whenever one of our caches has an unusual feature that might later be called into question. This one was.

 

|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"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Keystone Approver:

For the record, WanderLost discussed this idea with other approvers (including myself) prior to posting the cache. We do this regularly whenever one of our caches has an unusual feature that might later be called into question. This one was.


 

So as a group of approvers, you decided that caches reserved for a particular person or group is absolutely acceptable. I gather then that if someone else hid a cache that was reserved for a particular person or group that it would be deemed acceptable and be approved?

 

____________

Gorak

 

I love frogs. They taste like chicken. Yum.

 

"Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been passionate, rebellious, and immature." --Tom Robbins

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by The Weasel:

"

Since when does being the Mickey Spillane of the logbook entitle you to have such special powers and importance.


 

No, no. It's the First Not To Find that are funny. Any DNF log after someone else found it is dry as a bone.

 

I got it, lets not let anybody else find it except this guy and then not hide any cache! He'll try for a month and we'll all laugh and laugh and laugh.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Gorak:

So as a group of approvers, you decided that caches reserved for a particular person or group is absolutely acceptable. I gather then that if someone else hid a cache that was reserved for a particular person or group that it would be deemed acceptable and be approved?


Nope, we didn't decide that at all, as an "absolute." We considered the facts of this particular individual cache and especially that the restriction would likely disappear after a short time, which it now has.

 

I can point to many caches where there are restrictions to a "particular person or group." I won't, because those other caches are not in question here, and no single cache serves as precedent for any others.

 

|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"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Gorak:

So as a group of approvers, you decided that caches reserved for a particular person or group is absolutely acceptable. I gather then that if someone else hid a cache that was reserved for a particular person or group that it would be deemed acceptable and be approved?


There is nothing in the current guidelines that prohibits reserving FTF, so yes we would approve it.

 

As for the deleting of logs, TPTB only care if logs are being deleted unfairly, such as because someone doesn't like someone else. In this case it was fairly noted that logs from anyone else would be deleted.

 

Do we really need another rule against these things? Who really cares? I think those that are complaining just wish they had thought of the idea first icon_rolleyes.gif

 

Hemlock

Volunteer Cache Reviewer

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Hemlock:

There is nothing in the current guidelines that prohibits reserving FTF, so yes we would approve it.

 

As for the deleting of logs, TPTB only care if logs are being deleted unfairly, such as because someone doesn't like someone else. In this case it was fairly noted that logs from anyone else would be deleted.


 

Well, there is the solution to the people complaining about approvers getting FTF's.

 

______________________

Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand. - Homer Simpson

ChiTown Cachers * Keenpeople.com Stats

Link to comment

quote:
Keystone Approver wrote:

I can point to many caches where there are restrictions to a "particular person or group."


quote:
Hemlock wrote:

There is nothing in the current guidelines that prohibits reserving FTF, so yes we would approve it.


So by this logic, can I single out one or two people who cannot log a First to Find on my caches?

 

quote:
Hemlock wrote:

Who really cares? I think those that are complaining just wish they had thought of the idea first


I didn't think of it first, but if it's an available option, I might like to exploit it.

 

*****

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Hemlock:

Do we really need another rule against these things? Who really cares? I think those that are complaining just wish they had thought of the idea first icon_rolleyes.gif


 

You misunderstand. I was in no way suggesting that we needed a new rule. I was asking because the whole concept of Reserved Caches gave me some interesting ideas and I wanted to ensure that they would be approved before I went any further. In fact, a similar concept crossed my mind not too long ago but I dismissed the idea assuming that the cache would not be approved.

 

____________

Gorak

 

I love frogs. They taste like chicken. Yum.

 

"Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been passionate, rebellious, and immature." --Tom Robbins

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

I didn't think of it first, but if it's an available option, I might like to exploit it.


Sounds like you and I are thinking along the same lines. icon_cool.gif

 

____________

Gorak

 

I love frogs. They taste like chicken. Yum.

 

"Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been passionate, rebellious, and immature." --Tom Robbins

Link to comment

I have hidden 2 caches that were intended for a special group to find and log before the true coordinates were made public.

 

Both of these caches were milestone 100th find caches for certain individuals. I see no problem with them. After they were logged by the intended people, they were opened to the public.

 

With over 100,000 caches now available for hunting, I don't see the big deal that one was placed with the intentions that a certain person or group log it first.

 

El Diablo

 

Everything you do in life...will impact someone,for better or for worse.

http://www.geo-hikingstick.com

Link to comment

quote:
El Diablo wrote:

I don't see the big deal that one was placed with the intentions that a certain person or group log it first.


Since you are excluding a group of people (i.e., the rest of the local community), would it make it OK if I excluded a group of two or three specific cachers?

 

*****

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Doc-Dean:

It sounds to be in very poor taste to me.


Do you want caches with good taste or caches that taste good? (with apologies to Charlie)

 

quote:
Next we'll hear someone only making a cache for women or only for everyone except people with the letter G in their names! icon_rolleyes.gif

Girlstuff

Hey Ladies!

 

There are probably more, but these two are both within 5km of me.

 

____________

Gorak

 

I love frogs. They taste like chicken. Yum.

 

"Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been passionate, rebellious, and immature." --Tom Robbins

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Gorak:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=8ac92d32-27e4-453b-b1e7-8180285d919d

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=def0374c-62e8-491f-a491-f9876a2a5571

 

There are probably more, but these two are both within 5km of me.


The difference being that both of these caches are themed and not restricted. In other words, there is nothing in their description that says "if a guy logs a find here, I will delete it".

 

We are obviously at the mercy of the approvers in the current system implemented and there is no "internal affairs". I'd like to hear about a situation where an approver wanted to do something slightly controversial and the other approvers told them "no way in hell". Obviously, if you were to tell one approver no to something questionable, then you have to wonder if they will be as receptive to your questionable idea later...and thus the blue shield is up and running.

 

This is not *necessarily* the way things are run here OR how any of the approvers treat the system...but the intrinsic natures of the system and of humans lends itself well to this.

 

This is why I thought the approver guidelines were a valid and important addition and as Mark said, worst case scenarios should have been better explored and solutions found to be guidelined. Rather than having secret approver chats on how to interpret the rules...the rules should be better laid out.

 

Keystone even stated that prior caches are not valid defense for future caches...if both caches are to be approved under the same guideline set, then that would not be true and many fewer hard feelings, etc. would go along with getting caches established.

 

A simple complete set of guidelines mean that this whole thread would have been avoided because Misguided (ironic...) would have played this game prior to submission/activation of the cache and all the wackiness would have been available but it would have started with "Wander gave me the opportunity to search for this one before putting it on the website...." instead of "If you log here, you will be deleted...".

 

--

 

The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than

the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one.

-George Bernard Shaw

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Bull Moose:

From a different perspective, if FTFs are important to you, what does a FTF mean if it's handed to you? Isn't the point of a first to find that you beat the other people there fair and square?

 

I don't get it. icon_confused.gif

 

---Stats banner used to be here.---


This makes a whole lot of sense to me. While I believe that a cache placer has every right to stipulate who opens their box full of their personal property which they are responsible for, I also don't see the glory in coming in first in a race with no other contestants. You would be the first to find it, but without competition, it is nothing to brag about.

 

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

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

quote:
El Diablo wrote:

I don't see the big deal that one was placed with the intentions that a certain person or group log it first.


Since you are excluding a group of people (i.e., the rest of the local community), would it make it OK if I excluded a group of two or three specific cachers?

 

*****


 

J5, as usual, you take everything to the extreme. The cache in question as well as my caches were eventually opened to the public. It wasn't like they were made private for any signifigant amount of time. I see no harm in a cacher placing a cache for a special cacher to find and then opening it to the public.

 

El Diablo

 

I edited this post to take out a comment that was made to J5 that was uncalled for. I apologize for the comment.

 

Everything you do in life...will impact someone,for better or for worse.

http://www.geo-hikingstick.com

 

[This message was edited by El Diablo on November 04, 2003 at 05:10 PM.]

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Gorak:

You misunderstand. I was in no way suggesting that we needed a new rule. I was asking because the whole concept of Reserved Caches gave me some interesting ideas and I wanted to ensure that they would be approved before I went any further. In fact, a similar concept crossed my mind not too long ago but I dismissed the idea assuming that the cache would not be approved.


I think you have the answer to that now. But realize that the majority of the guidelines we have now were created as a response to complaints. If we start getting huge numbers of reserved caches, I can imagine there will be enough complaints to create another guideline. Heck, just look at the number of complaints to just ONE reserved cache... icon_rolleyes.gif

quote:
Originally posted by ju66l3r:

I'd like to hear about a situation where an approver wanted to do something slightly controversial and the other approvers told them "no way in hell".


I don't know if it qualifies as controversial, but I created a virtual a while back that I thought was sufficiently novel and unique. After submitting the page I ran it by the other reviewers and was basically told "no way in hell" and that a physical could easily be placed there. After some discussion I had some really good ideas so I went out and placed a physical. And you know what? I think it's a better cache now because of that.

 

Hemlock

Volunteer Cache Reviewer

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...