Jump to content

Opting Out.


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

This isn't a stat debate though the stats discussions got me to thinking.

 

In stats there are some members who would choose to opt out were the option available.

 

One of the universal rules of caching is to sign the log book. Even cache lurkers sign the log book. As many as 60% of the entries in one logbook I saw were not followed up by an online log.

 

Yet I can easily scan a log book and post it on line and I will start doing that on some of the archived caches I own just for posterity. I'll also post email logs as notes if the finder chooses to log that way. Logs are part of the game.

 

This means to truly opt out of being counted you have to not log online, not log the log book, not email the owner, not mention the find to them in passing, and pretty much be a wast of my time as a cache owner placing a cache since I will never have any idea of their enjoyment (or rage if it's a CRAPPY cache). I will miss out on problems they didn't tell me about and other things that I need to know as a cache owner. This game wasn't meant to be played by ghosts.

 

Fortunatly there are a lot of cachers out there that do take the time to do it right. My hat is off to you.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment
This isn't a stat debate though the stats discussions got me to thinking.

 

In stats there are some members who would choose to opt out were the option available.

 

One of the universal rules of caching is to sign the log book. Even cache lurkers sign the log book. As many as 60% of the entries in one logbook I saw were not followed up by an online log.

 

Yet I can easily scan a log book and post it on line and I will start doing that on some of the archived caches I own just for posterity. I'll also post email logs as notes if the finder chooses to log that way. Logs are part of the game.

 

This means to truly opt out of being counted you have to not log online, not log the log book, not email the owner, not mention the find to them in passing, and pretty much be a wast of my time as a cache owner placing a cache since I will never have any idea of their enjoyment (or rage if it's a CRAPPY cache). I will miss out on problems they didn't tell me about and other things that I need to know as a cache owner. This game wasn't meant to be played by ghosts.

 

Fortunatly there are a lot of cachers out there that do take the time to do it right. My hat is off to you.

I was about to jump all over this one - til I realized that I agreed with it 100%.

 

I have never understood why somebody would want to prevent people from knowing about their adventures (or mis-adventures).

 

At a recent event we were discussing the best part of geocaching - most everybody agreed it's the hunt and/or location - but too many people forget it's also the PEOPLE who hide the d@mn tupperware or film cannister - no people - no geocaching.

 

If you don't give the people feedback - they're more likely to quit - and the "game" dies..

 

Basically tho - he's right - if you want to "opt-out" just don't log online, sign logbooks, or email the owners.

 

Of course - what's the point then? If it's to get out and hike - you don't need a gps for that. If it's to find stuff - there's waypoint.org...

 

southdeltan

Link to comment

Ummm... I have to disagree wholeheartedly on this.

 

The logbook is the key. Not the online logging or anything else.

 

I'd have a major problem if I were the type that only signed the logbook and an owner started logging for me. In fact, I'd probably be highly upset. It could very well be a reason that I didn't log online. I don't need anyone "helping" me in this regard.

 

I think this would be a bad idea.

Link to comment

How will I find other geocachers in my area and meet them and talk to them if I never sign the log and never log them online? I guess we all have different goals. I'm thanking everyone for giving me a great reason to get outside, enjoy nature, and get some well needed excersise.

Edited by Brianslost
Link to comment

I wish everyone would log their finds and notes on-line. It is good feed back for owners and finders who are watching). I would especially like to see on-line logs by those finders who write in the log book that they took a travel bug and the bug and the cacher are never heard from again.

Link to comment

Once you leave a cache out in the world and publicly advertise it's coordinates, you invite anyone with a GPS receiver to go find it. You have absolutely no control over what happens next. They can opt to log in at the cache, online, both, or neither. Would you require that caches listed on multiple sites be logged online multiple times? I rather enjoy reading the physical logs of the rare accidental finder.

 

The only way to force online logs is to require registration with a listing service in order to view cache pages. Is that the direction we need to be headed in? You could make all of your caches multis, and require an online log to the first stage before emailing coords to the subsequent stage(s).

Link to comment

I think everyone should log their finds in the log book and online, but if they only want to sign the logbook, I think that's very comendable also. They are completely doing it for themselves (not that people that log online aren't) and they want no part of the numbers, etc. etc.

Link to comment

I don't see this as a black & white situation. I log my finds on geocaching.com and am happy to have folks read them there. But I'm not granting carte blanche to anyone else who might want to come along and use my writing. I might agree with their plans, I might not. It would only be polite to get my permission first, or if they don't, to at least delete my info if I ask them to.

 

I shouldn't have to not log on-line just because someone might come along and use the data without my permission.

Link to comment

oh, i make lots of logs. good ones, too, not just the crappy TNLNSL.

 

i'm just saying that if there were competitive stats, i'd feel obligated to sign the logbook, email the owner (where formerly i wold have made an online log) and only log online sometimes.

 

i know how many caches i've found. if you want to know too, you can get nearly reliable results from my cache page. when it becomes a competition, i'm auditing the course. why shouldn't i be able to opt out of a stats listing?

 

if you don't want your race results recorded, you can always DNF. nobody forces you to DNS.

 

yeah, you can say i was there. you still can't force me to claim a find, and you can't force me to actually tell my story. i don't mind having people know i was there. i just don't want to be part of a stat rating system. if my choices are to be part of that or to stop reporting accurate total, i'll stop reporting accurate totals.

 

edit: liked this version better.

Edited by flask
Link to comment

I don't want to encourage anonymity. We see all too many examples how people can behave in less than acceptable manor when they don't think others will find out who they are. Look at the sock puppets people hide behind. Many people will say and do things that we find completely unacceptable when veiled under the cloak of being anonymous. Trading down, taking and not leaving, not 'playing fair' are already problems we all encounter. People will still chose not to log, for whatever reason. I just don't want to make 'cheating' any easier.

Link to comment

i'm not proposing to claim finds i don't have; that would be cheating.

i'm not proposing to take without leaving. it's not cheating, but it's not good, either.

 

one need not be part of a ranking system to not cheat. i can say in my NOTE that i found it or didn't. i'm not anonymous, and i'm not lying. it just won't show up in the stats. i will have told the truth, just as if criminal goes to a virt and doesn't log it, or if jamiez goes to an event and doesn't claim a find.

 

lurkers are almost never considered to be cheating. how would i be cheating if i just became a lurker? usually they punish cheaters by deleting their logs. so go ahead. delete my non-log. if you want to delete my legitimate logs too, that makes the stats even LESS reliable.

Link to comment

Forced competition is the equivalent of calling any old motorist a loser/cheater because they choose not to race you at the stoplight. It's human nature to want to compete. Many of us choose not to. If the top ten cachers opted out, how would that diminish the claim to superiority of the new top ten?

 

If a man wins an olympic foot race, you could say he is the fastest man in the world. No one would dispute this claim. There might be one, or ten, or twenty people throughout the world who could run the same distance faster, but because they aren't competing, it does not diminish his claim. Forced stats is the equivalent of the olympic judges forcing every person in the world to race each other before deciding upon a winner. Even in the olympics there are factors which can disqualify people from competition. (Drug use, etc.) There are factors that make some people better able to find caches than others (free time, flexible hours, money for gas, cache density, etc). Yet we don't disqualify retirees because they have more time to cache. Let those who wish to compete do so, and those who wish to abstain do so as well. I don't plan on having the most finds in my city, state, country, or world. But if you want to know how I feel about the caches I have found, see my sig line. :lol:

Link to comment

I will never log (online) a member's only cache (nor email the owner) as protest of the exclusionary behaviour.

 

(IE, exclude others, I'll exclude you from the "reward".)

 

Otherwise, I favor logging online, like to "thank" cache placers through my online logs but don't mind if others don't. The physical book rules. It'll be there if GC.com folds or dissappears and isn't likely to be falsified.

 

Enjoy (in your own fashions),

 

Randy

Link to comment

I have talked to one person that never logs his finds online due to his dislike of the numbers game. I told him he could always post a note saying he'd found it but not use the "found it" option. That satisfied him and I believe thats what he's doing now. I personally log my info as found, not found, or a true note etc. The numbers arent what I care about. Im just here to have fun w/ my kid and bf.

Link to comment
I have talked to one person that never logs his finds online due to his dislike of the numbers game. I told him he could always post a note saying he'd found it but not use the "found it" option. That satisfied him and I believe thats what he's doing now. I personally log my info as found, not found, or a true note etc. The numbers arent what I care about. Im just here to have fun w/ my kid and bf.

That is a perfect way to opt out of stats and yet still give back to the game.

Link to comment
This isn't a stat debate though the stats discussions got me to thinking.

 

In stats there are some members who would choose to opt out were the option available.

 

One of the universal rules of caching is to sign the log book. Even cache lurkers sign the log book. As many as 60% of the entries in one logbook I saw were not followed up by an online log.

 

Yet I can easily scan a log book and post it on line and I will start doing that on some of the archived caches I own just for posterity. I'll also post email logs as notes if the finder chooses to log that way. Logs are part of the game.

 

This means to truly opt out of being counted you have to not log online, not log the log book, not email the owner, not mention the find to them in passing, and pretty much be a wast of my time as a cache owner placing a cache since I will never have any idea of their enjoyment (or rage if it's a CRAPPY cache). I will miss out on problems they didn't tell me about and other things that I need to know as a cache owner. This game wasn't meant to be played by ghosts.

 

Fortunatly there are a lot of cachers out there that do take the time to do it right. My hat is off to you.

I don't log online. If there is a problem with the cache, I will drop the owner an email. I DO sign the logbook. Even if you post a picture of my signature on your cache page, even if you post a note that I found your cache, my numbers will still stay at 0 caches found. No one should be forced to play a numbers game, and I refuse to be in any kind of competition. That's my choice. There SHOULD be an "opt-out" to hide your find numbers, allowing a cacher to post their log entries to a cache page, without keeping track of how many finds they have. Right now there isn't a choice, so I just keep track of my finds myself, I know exactly how many I have found.

Link to comment

One thing I would consider... Maybe some of the older (or any age for that matter) cachers are computer illiterate and don't know how to log a find. Perhaps someone turned them on to this site and showed them how to enter their zip code to get the coord's, but didn't teach them how to upload! It is simple I know, but... some I would suspect just don't know how to do it! <_<

 

IMHO

Link to comment

I apologize if I have upset some people with my comments; I was reading the entire contents on the original statement by Renegade Knight and my comments were in response to the entire statement. If we are to consider the entire statement, to truly opt out "This means to truly opt out of being counted you have to not log online, not log the logbook ,..." Also I enjoy reading the logs online from people who have found my cache, this could easily be accomplished if they posted a note, I think that a great idea for those who don't wnat to count numbers. Even then if they chose not to log the find online, I'm ok with that. The part that I don't want to see go away, or not require cachers to do , is log the find in my log book in the cache. That is where if people know it's not a requirement to sign the log, I can see them as being less than fair in trades. And no, I don't think for a minute this will really make a difference. Honest people are honest and dishonest people will use sock puppets and lie in the log book. I'm just saying I don't want to give the message that since people are going to do what ever they are going to do anyway, we should make signing the log book something they can opt out of. So if someone wants to have the counters turned off, great. But unless I misread what Renegade wrote, he was talking about opting out being more than just counting or not counting stats.

Link to comment

I have a friend who caches with me regularly. He has a GPSr but has never registered with GC.com.

He has no screen name. He has no computer (he gets his coordinates from me). He always signs the physical log.

He has found approximitely 30-35 caches. He's as excited about the game as am I, but for the purposes of this discussion, he's a muggle.

He could use my computer to log his finds, but he just doesn't care.

He has opted out in the ultimate fashion. Would he care if a scanned copy of a log he's signed showed up on this website? I doubt it.

Interestingly enough, if he locates the cache before me, he insists on signing the log first.

And I don't really care. :D<_<

Link to comment
TEAM 360

I don't log online. If there is a problem with the cache, I will drop the owner an email. I DO sign the logbook. Even if you post a picture of my signature on your cache page, even if you post a note that I found your cache, my numbers will still stay at 0 caches found. No one should be forced to play a numbers game, and I refuse to be in any kind of competition. That's my choice. There SHOULD be an "opt-out" to hide your find numbers, allowing a cacher to post their log entries to a cache page, without keeping track of how many finds they have. Right now there isn't a choice, so I just keep track of my finds myself, I know exactly how many I have found.

<_< I find this kind of sad. Not complaining or saying should or shouldn't, just sad. Sad because you can't just enjoy the activity and not worry or care about what others think about your numbers. I log finds, DNF, and notes. Not because I give a rat's a..... about numbers, but because I like sharing my story. If somebody thinks I'm a good cacher or a bad cacher because of my numbers that's their problem. Now sometimes my story is kind of lame, well actually much of the time, but that can be fun too. I put a watch on many of the caches I find just to read the stories of other cachers.

 

That being said, there is no way to control how people behave. If somebody wishes to log, or not log, that's their choice and we all have let them be. It's better to accept people where they are than try to change them. We can have all kinds of feeling about cachers behavior, and that's ok. But neither you nor I are going to change another person's behavior.

 

Enjoy the moment.

enjoy all moments.

Byron

Link to comment
TEAM 360

I don't log online. If there is a problem with the cache, I will drop the owner an email. I DO sign the logbook. Even if you post a picture of my signature on your cache page, even if you post a note that I found your cache, my numbers will still stay at 0 caches found. No one should be forced to play a numbers game, and I refuse to be in any kind of competition. That's my choice. There SHOULD be an "opt-out" to hide your find numbers, allowing a cacher to post their log entries to a cache page, without keeping track of how many finds they have. Right now there isn't a choice, so I just keep track of my finds myself, I know exactly how many I have found.

:D I find this kind of sad. Not complaining or saying should or shouldn't, just sad. Sad because you can't just enjoy the activity and not worry or care about what others think about your numbers. I log finds, DNF, and notes. Not because I give a rat's a..... about numbers, but because I like sharing my story. If somebody thinks I'm a good cacher or a bad cacher because of my numbers that's their problem. Now sometimes my story is kind of lame, well actually much of the time, but that can be fun too. I put a watch on many of the caches I find just to read the stories of other cachers.

 

That being said, there is no way to control how people behave. If somebody wishes to log, or not log, that's their choice and we all have let them be. It's better to accept people where they are than try to change them. We can have all kinds of feeling about cachers behavior, and that's ok. But neither you nor I are going to change another person's behavior.

 

Enjoy the moment.

enjoy all moments.

Byron

Not sad at all...in fact, I enjoy the game even MORE because there is absolutely no pressure about my stats! And I never have to worry about some J.O. deleting my online logs, either...ever!

I used to put really creative stories on the cache pages...even poems about the hunt or the cache site...until one of the idiots in here decided to publicly mock them, so guess what? No more ammo! Seems no matter what you post on this board, someone is more than happy to tear it down and degrade it in order to try and show how much smarter they think they are. Now THAT'S the really sad part. I just play it my own way these days and am MUCH happier...besides, after so many finds, why bother? At this point all I would write anyhow is a "TNLNSL, TFTC" on their cache page, and who wants to see THAT?? <_<

Link to comment

What if everyone would do just like Team 360 and others and not log anything? Let's say you put out a cache and the cache has been visited 50 times over a year and nobody even as much as put a note on the page, WHO would still hide caches?

 

I for one think this is very childish. I would be willing to bet that the folks that decide to not log anything online for the sole purpose of "not playing part of the numbers game" really enjoy reading everyone elses logs on the caches they hide. If this is the case, then why not give others that same joy?

 

If everyone went into this mode of not logging anything on the page then again I ask, WHO WOULD STILL HIDE ALL THE CACHES FOR US TO FIND?

 

Happy cachin'! <_<

Edited by The Cache Couple
Link to comment
I for one think this is very childish.

Like telling others how to play the game, huh? What's really childish is all the finger pointing- "He's not playing right! He's not playing right!" LMAO!

Big whoop, so I don't log online...there is no rule that says one HAS to leave an online entry...is it really going to kill ya if you don't have my online entry on your cache page? Is ONE less entry going to make or break it?

Not at all. The next cacher will be along soon enough.

 

You want me to leave an online log? Fine, give me a way to turn off my stats. Simple enough.

Edited by TEAM 360
Link to comment

Ouch... <_< I am geocache newbie so I don't understand all this bitterness. You can all play the game any way you want. It is only a game. Its just sad that you can be so selfish as to not give back to the game for the enjoyment of others. If nobody were to log anything online and the cache had been there for 2 years I wouldn't go look for it.

 

For those that don't log it online, do you read other peoples logs?

 

Team 360 I would love to read your logs with poems and funny storys. How many cache owners or cache hunters have you given a smile and a good feeling when you took the time to thoughtfully log a find? You shouldn't let some forum bandit or cache owner natzi stop you. Do you enjoy reading the online logs of the 22 caches you have hidden? Its sad that their are people out there that would mock you for writing a silly poem but their will always be bullys and people trying to feel better about themselves by tearing down others. I have a neice who has travel bugs, she's 5. She loves hearing about her travel bugs. Next time you log a travel bug imagine a 5 year old girl having the log read to her and telling all her friends and relatives about how her bug is doing. B)

 

As far as stats go they don't mean ANYTHING. I have 2 finds. The secound was a multistage. If all I was interested in was numbers I wouldn't do any multi-stages. I wouldn't do anything that wasn't a 1-1. The stats are interesting and fun but they will never be definitive as to who is the best cacher or the fastest finder or who the winner is.

 

Here's my map of founds I'm proud of both of them- Found Map

 

Anyway team360 you have inspired me to spice up my logs. Maybe in 2 years I'll be as burned out and negative as you, but I hope not. :D

Link to comment
  You want me to leave an online log? Fine, give me a way to turn off my stats. Simple enough.

I agree. One should be able to "opt out" (on a permanent basis only) of having their statistics recorded and displayed. And anyone who chooses to do so should not have the ability to view the statistics of other players.

Edited by Innovational Cacher
Link to comment

We don't care if you read:

Our records.

Our DNFails. (Too many but we still don't care!)

About our finds.

About our trades.

 

These are just the stats that Geocaching.com keeps for us. You can use them or abuse them any way you want.

 

BB logs to keep track of what WE did, when WE did it, and any comments WE might add. We just can not physically compete with many. We are not worried about anyone comparing us with/against/whatever you. There's no compasison - you'll win! We love the journal aspect of Geocaching.com.

 

We wouldn't care if the only stats we could read were ours, if it comes to that. We haven't been inspired by stats but (Perhaps a note to 360 here.) we have been inspired by what others have written about a cache and the experiences they have had.

 

If you jaw in the forums forever you will not stop this river. New technology might, but jawing won't. In the mean time we will be caching.

 

BB

 

P.S. It is not the 'imperial we.' BB is a team.

Link to comment
  You want me to leave an online log? Fine, give me a way to turn off my stats. Simple enough.

I agree. One should be able to "opt out" (on a permanent basis only) of having their statistics recorded and displayed. And anyone who chooses to do so should not have the ability to view the statistics of other players.

I like that idea a lot. It seems fair to me that if you don't want people to see your stats, then you shouldn't be able to see theirs. Also, I would encourage people to not leave an online log for the caches put out by the people in this thread who feel they don't need to log their finds. Seems fair to me.

 

--RuffRidr

Link to comment

Since some people would rather “Opt Out” of stats how about an “Opt In” option? If you really want stats that bad you could opt in. So instead of the default being involved with stats, you are given the opportunity to join the stats game.

 

This should be a reasonable solution for everyone.

Link to comment

No. Statistics require the lion's share of the information. There are far too many people who would not care if their numbers are listed, even if they do not view the statistics page and yet it is that apathy for the statistics page which would mean they would not participate in an opt-in system. The greater concern is for those who have an aversion to being counted. Opt-out is by far the better method for inclusion here.

 

Our public voting system is opt-in....enough said.

Link to comment
"This isn't a stat debate though the stats discussions got me to thinking."

 

"Yet I can easily scan a log book and post it on line and I will start doing that on some of the archived caches I own just for posterity. I'll also post email logs as notes if the finder chooses to log that way. Logs are part of the game."

I said earlier that I wish people would log their visits but I have no wish to FORCE them log visits. Scanning written logs and posting private emails might be considered an abuse of gc.com services at minimum and certainly is highly disrespectful of some cacher's desire for privacy. I'm reasonably sure the game was never intended to dictate how people log their finds. I would HATE to see that happen.

 

This debate IS about stats because logging finds results in stats. This topic is not generating all these comments because of a few missing log entries.

 

I'm concerned about potential backlash here. I would hate to see any movement toward eliminating stats again. If the numbers go I'd probably quit the sport. In that regard I cannot even begin to comprehend the concerns of those who are so against stats that they would not log their cache visits for that reason only. Or even the concerns of those who do log but don’t want stats shown. I've tried hard for two years now to figure this out but haven't seen any logical or emotional argument that helps me understand these concerns.

 

My philosophy is pretty basic on this: I don't care about what other's think about my numbers. If they are as impressed as I am then good, if they don't care about my numbers, or judge me by them, that is fine.

 

35 cache finds (arbitrary number) is a respectable number and represents a substantial amount of activity. Why would it bother anyone to have that number shown beside their log entry? 100 finds is not hard to do. 200 is a fine lifetime achievement. These are easily obtainable numbers over a two year period, or more. For me, the numbers are a representation of the fun I've had. And… the fun my friends and other cachers are having. I celebrate everyone's finds right along with them.

Link to comment
I have a friend who caches with me regularly. He has a GPSr but has never registered with GC.com.

He has no screen name. He has no computer (he gets his coordinates from me). He always signs the physical log.

He has found approximitely 30-35 caches. He's as excited about the game as am I, but for the purposes of this discussion, he's a muggle.

Your friend is NOT a muggle! Muggles in geocaching are non-caching (non-magical) citizens who might, or might not vandalize a cache or, most likely, will never even see a cache.

 

Your friend caches - therefore he's got "magic".

 

Non-logging cachers are cachers just the same as loggers with all the rights and privileges thereof.

Link to comment

OK, I didn't slog through every one of these posts, so if this is repetitive, I apologize. The only issue I have with people not logging their visits online is a very selfish one.

 

Every so often I like to do a search from my home coordinates to see if anybody's found anything nearby, just to see what they've written, and so I can say to myself, "Oh yeah, I remember that one. . ." If you just post a note, it doesn't show up on the general search. I suppose I could add everything nearby to my watch list, but that seems rather cumbersome.

 

But then, there are probably some people who don't want me to know they've been there, so maybe it's a moot point.

Link to comment
Not sad at all...in fact, I enjoy the game even MORE because there is absolutely no pressure about my stats!

When are you going to go out and find your first cache? You've got all these crazy ideas and no finds. Usually we call those people trolls, but you've been around too long to be called that :D

He doesn't log his finds just so that people like you won't put him down because he doesn't have enough experience caching. It doesn't take much digging to find he is an active cacher he just doesn't like to log his finds online.

 

You should read the whole thread before you slam someone... <_<

 

You pretty much perfectly illustrated his point of why he doesn't log his finds even though I disagree with him and would encourage him to log his finds out of respect for the owner of the cache if nothing else.

Link to comment
<<SNIP>>

He doesn't log his finds just so that people like you won't put him down because he doesn't have enough experience caching.

<<SNIP>>

 

You pretty much perfectly illustrated his point of why he doesn't log his finds<<SNIP>>

Sorry, but that has nothing to do with it.

Link to comment

In an email to another cacher on a related topic, I used the race analogy. It really demonstrates why I (and perhaps others) wish to opt out of stats.

 

Who ever heard of a race where the participants started at different dates and times, and each ran courses of differing difficulty and terrain? How would you know who the winner is?

 

Stats are just that, Interesting statistics. The problem is when you try to use them to determine something about the person they represent.

 

If one cacher has 200 finds, and another has 100 finds, you might draw some rapid conclusions about the ability and experience of the cachers based upon this number. This would be erroneous.

 

What the stats really say is that cacher #1 has 200 finds and has found them over the course of 3 years. He uses a Garmin legend, and a laptop. He gets pocket queries, and uses Watcher to take the caches into the field with him. He drives a jeep grand Cherokee, and has enough expendable income to pay for all the gas while caching. He is semi-retired, and has 80 hours of free time each week, 35 of which he uses to go caching. He lives in an area that has 327 caches within 100 miles of his home, and 75% of those caches are single stage caches. Of the single stage caches, 63% are less than 2.5 stars in difficulty and terrain. He has an old wound in his right leg, which makes walking long distances painful at times.

 

Write your own description of the resources and individual situation of the thousands of people who could be cacher #2.

 

The stats mean diddly squat when you really get into it. They are not even remotely accurate for determining an individual cacher's skill or ability. Or even experience when you consider that multis are like finding more than one cache at times.

 

It is for this reason, (the inherently misleading numbers, and the flawed conclusions that can be drawn from them) that I would choose to opt out of stats.

Link to comment
We don't care if you read:

Our records.

Our DNFails. (Too many but we still don't care!)

About our finds.

About our trades.

 

These are just the stats that Geocaching.com keeps for us. You can use them or abuse them any way you want.

 

BB logs to keep track of what WE did, when WE did it, and any comments WE might add. We just can not physically compete with many. We are not worried about anyone comparing us with/against/whatever you. There's no compasison - you'll win! We love the journal aspect of Geocaching.com.

 

We wouldn't care if the only stats we could read were ours, if it comes to that. We haven't been inspired by stats but (Perhaps a note to 360 here.) we have been inspired by what others have written about a cache and the experiences they have had.

 

If you jaw in the forums forever you will not stop this river. New technology might, but jawing won't. In the mean time we will be caching.

 

BB

 

P.S. It is not the 'imperial we.' BB is a team.

BB,

 

I think you guys get the big picture. Stats are nothing more than one way to look at the game and a side effect of the fact that some of us log our finds online. Those logs tell a story. You can look at the logs of a cache and see the caches story or you can look at the logs of a cacher and see the story they are telling.

 

Some people like Oregone are legends for logs, others don't even bother and tell no story at all but even the TNLN logs tell you the cache is alive an well and that the cacher is still breathing.

 

I enjoyed the stats, it was fun to beat a friend of mine in Twin Falls for awhile and he had just as much fun when he passed me up. Nobody else cared and when we had the stats site nobody really complained about them in the forums. Not like now.

 

The entire point of opting out isn't an option isn't stats, it's about the logs, the stories and the adventures that have been (and should be) captured for all to read and as a part of the legacy that we will leave behind. Today those logs are a way to say things to the cache owner, tell our caching buddies what we are up to and so forth. Tomorrow our children will be able to read them after we are gone and learn a little about us if they care to take the time.

Link to comment
Also, I would encourage people to not leave an online log for the caches put out by the people in this thread who feel they don't need to log their finds. Seems fair to me.

 

--RuffRidr

I won't worry about it. If people want to come and find my caches, and not log their find online, that is absolutely fine with me. Unlike some people in here, I won't try to FORCE a cacher to play the game any particular way. I put my caches out there for the hunt, and only hope that the finder had a good time caching. Whether or not they choose to log it online is up to them, as long as they sign the logbook. I respect their privacy. I only expect the same.

Link to comment

Well if everyone agrees that the stats are just interesting numbers and are no reall measurement of anything why is it so important to opt out? Why not log your finds? So what if some putz logs 1000 virtual finds in a week. I think stats like how many caches a day have been found or which cache has been found the most, would be a lot of fun.

 

The game is severely disadvantaged if finds aren't logged online.

 

I respectfully disagree with those who feel it necessary to not log their finds because they can't opt out. I haven't been here long enough to understand why they feel this is necessary. I don't believe a opt out option will increase the number of logged finds.

 

Happy caching to all, whether you log or not. My new goal is to make the world a nicer place one log entry at a time. I also want to try my hand at finding Team360's michigan micro's because reading those logs was interesting.

Link to comment
I don't see this as a black & white situation. I log my finds on geocaching.com and am happy to have folks read them there. But I'm not granting carte blanche to anyone else who might want to come along and use my writing. I might agree with their plans, I might not. It would only be polite to get my permission first, or if they don't, to at least delete my info if I ask them to.

 

I shouldn't have to not log on-line just because someone might come along and use the data without my permission.

The log book belongs to the cache owner to do with as they please. Think of it as grafitti on someone's house; does that mean the owner has to leave it alone? The same is true with everything in the online logs and these Forums for that matter, they are the property of Groundspeak to do with as they please.

Link to comment
Not sad at all...in fact, I enjoy the game even MORE because there is absolutely no pressure about my stats!

When are you going to go out and find your first cache? You've got all these crazy ideas and no finds. Usually we call those people trolls, but you've been around too long to be called that B)

He doesn't log his finds just so that people like you won't put him down because he doesn't have enough experience caching. It doesn't take much digging to find he is an active cacher he just doesn't like to log his finds online.

 

You should read the whole thread before you slam someone... B)

 

You pretty much perfectly illustrated his point of why he doesn't log his finds even though I disagree with him and would encourage him to log his finds out of respect for the owner of the cache if nothing else.

Ever seen one of these: B) ???

 

I know Jeff personally. He's even been to my house. If he doesn't like my jokes, he can PM me.

Link to comment

It is for this reason, (the inherently misleading numbers, and the flawed conclusions that can be drawn from them) that I would choose to opt out of stats.

What the stats really say is that cacher #1 has 200 finds and has found them over the course of 3 years....

 

Yes, and you could get an average find per time period ratio from that that could be compared to another cacher's average find per time period ratio.

 

#1 - 200 finds over 3 years

#2 - 50 finds over 4 months

 

#2 has cached at a rate 2.25x than #1 regardless of the extraneous information you provided. That is a simple fact. BUT let's look at #1's finds per available caches and you'll see:

 

#1 - 327 caches in 100 miles

#2 - 800 caches in 100 miles

 

#1 has found 200 of 327 caches while #2 has only found 50 of 600 caches in the same area. Even if #2 keeps up his same pace for the full 3 years, he will still not have completed much more than half of his 100 mile radius available while #1 has a bit less than 2/3rds of his completed. Cacher #1 is much better at covering his density while #1 is not even though #1 has more caches and is more frantic in his first 4 months.

 

The difficulty and terrains can be figured into it too, but I think that's a good enough example of how these things can be used to examine and even compare 2 people. The extraneous information of resources available and mitigating injuries is completely irrelevant in comparing their statistics. Simply because the point is to see how fast two cachers have accomplished what they have *given their conditions over that time period*. Any two baseball players have completely different physiques and yet we line them up against each other to see who has the better batting average or HR numbers. The same is true here. The people who correctly examine statistics know that different strengths and weaknesses in resources and ability are what give people their different rankings. Simply because there is a winner in a specific statistical category doesn't some how claim that the people compared started on any sort of level ground..and it's the analysis of these mitigating circumstances that can sometimes even make it even more interesting.

 

Imagine if the gimpy old retired cacher you described was caching circles around the healthy, yet out of work, 30-something who lived next door and aside from age and health, they were identical in profile....*then* the statistics really scream something more than they show. In fact, look at New England where our reigning FTF king doesn't even use a GPSr! That's a statistic that since we have the background on the cacher suddenly stands out as a truly impressive feat as opposed to simply being interesting that his FTF/find is high. Add to that the fact that if you look over the past week or month at the regional FTF/find counts, he may actually be soon dethroned by some recent FTF hunters (even if they are using GPSr).

 

Statistics are entirely what you examine and the mitigating factors you describe only flesh out the interpretation but the initial comparison of a 4.5 vs a 6.3 is still a valid comparison since they are just numbers calculated in identical fashion.

 

Even still, giving the ability to opt out of the statistics/comparison would be entirely reasonable. But the numbers themselves as they are calculated are never misleading if the assumptions behind the calculation are sound and minimalized.

Link to comment
This isn't a stat debate though the stats discussions got me to thinking.

 

In stats there are some members who would choose to opt out were the option available.

 

One of the universal rules of caching is to sign the log book.  Even cache lurkers sign the log book.  As many as 60% of the entries in one logbook I saw were not followed up by an online log.

 

Yet I can easily scan a log book and post it on line and I will start doing that on some of the archived caches I own just for posterity.  I'll also post email logs as notes if the finder chooses to log that way.  Logs are part of the game.

 

This means to truly opt out of being counted you have to not log online, not log the log book, not email the owner, not mention the find to them in passing, and pretty much be a wast of my time as a cache owner placing a cache since I will never have any idea of their enjoyment (or rage if it's a CRAPPY cache).  I will miss out on problems they didn't tell me about and other things that I need to know as a cache owner.  This game wasn't meant to be played by ghosts. 

 

Fortunatly there are a lot of cachers out there that do take the time to do it right.  My hat is off to you.

 

I have to call you on this one. While I always sign the log book, always post finds and also DNFs, who are you or I to tell others how to play the game? If we only are doing this for our own enjoyment, it would be one thing -- but the main reason I put out caches is for other folks to have fun finding them. Why do they have to tell me the story of their search and find? They can post it or keep it to themself. Their call entirely.

 

I really don't like your concept of taking written logs and posting them on the site, when the persons who signed the log book opted to not post. Who exactly are you doing this for -- perhaps just your own satisfaction?

 

Please don't take this the wrong way -- this is not in any way a personal attack -- just expressing my viewpoints on the issue.

 

HM

Edited by hikemeister
Link to comment
This isn't a stat debate though the stats discussions got me to thinking.

 

In stats there are some members who would choose to opt out were the option available.

 

One of the universal rules of caching is to sign the log book. Even cache lurkers sign the log book. As many as 60% of the entries in one logbook I saw were not followed up by an online log.

 

Yet I can easily scan a log book and post it on line and I will start doing that on some of the archived caches I own just for posterity. I'll also post email logs as notes if the finder chooses to log that way. Logs are part of the game.

 

This means to truly opt out of being counted you have to not log online, not log the log book, not email the owner, not mention the find to them in passing, and pretty much be a wast of my time as a cache owner placing a cache since I will never have any idea of their enjoyment (or rage if it's a CRAPPY cache). I will miss out on problems they didn't tell me about and other things that I need to know as a cache owner. This game wasn't meant to be played by ghosts.

 

Fortunatly there are a lot of cachers out there that do take the time to do it right. My hat is off to you.

TOTAL SUPPORT!

Link to comment
Yet I can easily scan a log book and post it on line and I will start doing that on some of the archived caches I own just for posterity. I'll also post email logs as notes if the finder chooses to log that way. Logs are part of the game.

I would be very angry if you scanned my handwritten logs and posted them. Even more so if the cache were still active. My comments in the written logbook are different from my online ones. They are not meant to be shared with people who haven't found the cache. For example, I might mention tripping over the flat rock and not realizing the cache was under it. That would be a spoiler if it was posted online.

 

You shouldn't worry about the online logs. Most people seem to post them. Some don't. Keep in mind that several people find a dozen caches a day. Maybe they would rather spend the extra hour outside instead of at the computer.

 

Also, many people write logs on their PDA's (using Cachemate, for example) and may by waiting for a conduit that uploads them.

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...
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...