Jump to content

Why Do Locationless Caches Count As Finds?


Recommended Posts

im sure this is somewhere on the site, perhaps i over looked it, but why do locationless caches count as finds? Some of them are as easy as just walking down the street and snapping a picture with my gps.

 

but also let me ask, why do benchmarks not count as finds? you are actully locating something that should be there for a very long time but that doesnt count to your finds?

 

Myself, i think just real geocaches should count as finds, but thats just me. any one got my answers :o

 

aj

Link to comment
im sure this is somewhere on the site, perhaps i over looked it, but why do locationless caches count as finds? Some of them are as easy as just walking down the street and snapping a picture with my gps.

 

but also let me ask, why do benchmarks not count as finds? you are actully locating something that should be there for a very long time but that doesnt count to your finds?

 

Myself, i think just real geocaches should count as finds, but thats just me. any one got my answers :)

 

aj

Some traditional caches are just as easy as walking down my street and looking under a bench, so why not get credit for posting a picture of an American flag too? :o

Link to comment

The short answer is, they kinda do and kinda don't.

 

They count as finds because they are _currently_ classified as caches on this site.

 

They don't count as finds when you search "All Caches Found" by a particular user, even when you look at your own.

 

Whether they should count as finds is a completely different discussion that has been beaten to death 100 different other times in other threads.

 

The more interesting question is what will happen to them in the future, if anything. What ever anyone's personal feelings about the legitimacy of locationless caches are, it cannot be denied that they have certainly been "de-emphasized" over the past year or so.

 

My "completely wild guess with no supporting evidence whatsoever" is that they will be spun off into a category all their own a la benchmarks, and removed from the find counts. It's just not a particularly pressing or important matter to TPTB at this time.

 

Dave, The Cow Spots

Link to comment

Locationless are counted as a find because they are considered as a cache (ill leave it you to decide if you think they or not). Just like how virtuals, and every type of phyisical cache is counted as a find, no matter how hard or easy it was for you.

 

Because they are not considered to be caches :o . Which might explain why they have their own section and are tallied in their own catogory. There have been plans to do something with locationless to keep them out of the 'is it or isn't it a cache' arguements. Like give them their own section, but so far that hasn't happened.

 

Ok, but how you define a 'real cache' may not be the same as others, or even anyone for that matter. Until/unless everything you consider not to be a cache is given its own count, you either have to have them counted, or not post a 'find'

to the page (use a note instead).

Link to comment

As to virtuals, yeah, what the triclops said. As for benchmarks, they do count as finds, but in their own category. You can't count them as 'caches since their placement has nothing to do with geocaching. They are not placed by 'cachers or as caches, but they are out there to be found.

Link to comment

Myself, i think just real geocaches should count as finds, but thats just me. any one got my answers :o

 

What about Geoevents? Some of them are as easy as driving to a restaurant (many times already ID'ed in the description (with no need to use coordinates to find)).

 

What about Web cam caches? - Not finding any cache there.

 

Not getting into the what counts/ doesn't count feud, just pointing out that in addition to questioning locationless caches, arguements could be made about other items.

 

But you did say only real geocaches should count - so all three of them wouldn't count - which might be OK too.

Link to comment

You found it, no?

 

As for your find total, it's probably just the easiest way to provide a total. List them individualy then a grand total. You can emphasise whichever find count you want based on your own style. I know people that avoid virtuals like the plague. Should they do one they will post a note rather than a find just to keep it from counting. It's all relative.

Link to comment

Locationless caches count as finds because they are geocaches.

 

It is not as easy as you imply. It is not nearly as easy as walking down the street and grabbing a quick micro. They require a bit of work. You have to go out and visit a "real" location, take the photos, go back home and do a search to see if someone else has already used your proposed object, if not you process the photos, post your log and then upload the photos which with a 56k modem takes a lot of time.

 

For those of us who live in cache poor areas (yes you city dwellers, they do exist) locationless caches provide that much needed geo-hit when you've got nothing else to find.

 

For those who don't like locationless or virtual caches... quit questioning their right to exist and leave the rest of us in peace. We are having fun out here!

Edited by Team Sagefox
Link to comment

Why do locationless caches count as a find? You just snap a photo of something stupid while holding your GPS in your hands!

 

Why do multi caches count as a find? You must find a series of stupid film canister that are wet inside!

 

Why do virtual caches count as a find? There is nothing plastic to open!

 

Why do webcam caches count as a find? I don't want to see how ugly you look guys!

 

Why do traditional caches count as a find? I get allergic itches from Tupperware!

 

Why do mystery caches count as a find? It's a mystery for me!

 

Why do people ask stupid questions in this forum? It's also a mystery for me!

 

 

A lot of stupid questions... We are all different, unique, and we like different things. Some of us like to take drive-in caches, other like to find only micro caches, other hate them. Some enjoys LC, others hate them. Some hate multi caches, other persons just love them.

 

Instead of yelling and complaining, why not accept that people are different and they like different things...

Link to comment
For those who don't like locationless or virtual caches...  quit questioning their right to exist and leave the rest of us in peace.  We are having fun out here!

I was not questioning their right to exist but mearly asking why do they count as finds. Perhaps not everyone lives and dies by the geocaching.com rules/regs/guidlesines look some here. :P

 

if you like locationaless caches more power to ya, it dont bother me, i dont want them abolished i was just asking as to why they count as a find.

 

Jmbella, ohh i think so, other wise i couldnt ask ^_^ , heres your sign.

 

aj

Edited by AJ of Dunbar
Link to comment

I see what you are saying, AJ. Yeah, they are a find, but you didn't have to use a GPSr to find them. So I don't do locationless caches because I don't like to claim finds on things that I didn't have to use a GPSr to find. I "PERSONALLY" think locationless caches go against the original point of geocaching, yet I also understand why they are there for people that don't have many caches in their area to find.

To me, whether there is a cache to find at the end of the hunt isn't important. It's having to find a spot or a cache using coords that matters.

Still, I hold out hope that locationless caches get their own section someday like the benchmarks have. I don't see it happening though because someone that has a find count of 200 but 75 of those are locationless caches, will be ticked at GC.com when their find count doesn't reflect their locationless cache finds anymore.

Link to comment

Some of the locationless caches can be way to easy to find in for example US, but very hard to find in other countrys.

 

Like: Cigar Shop Indian, Totem pole, Barber pole and so on...

I had big problems finding an yellow Jeep in Sweden, and when I finally found it - the cache had just become archived. So I deleted the photos and then I heard "You can still log it." :o

 

So some caches are very challenging for some people while others can find them easy.

Link to comment

I am suprised that no one has mentioned this: Locationless caches count as finds because they are grandfathered in. Like old virtuals that don't meet the current guidelines, these caches aren't just done away with. From what I understand, locationless caches are going to be spun off in their own section once GC figures out what to do with them. I've found 3 and logged 2 locationless caches. The first I ever found was the Statue of Liberty Replicas, where you had to find one or more of 200 statues spread out through the US, some outside of the US. A very unique hunt (the one I found was already logged, so I only got a note). The two I actually logged? One was to find an airport that hadn't been logged - too easy... the hardest part was text-searching the log history to make sure our county airport hadn't been found yet, and the other was to find a skate park. When I first started caching, I thought a great idea for a locationless cache would be to take a picture of you and your GPS at a McD's. I thought, "Wouldn't it be great to see all of the ones around the world?" I now know that 1) It would never be approved, 2) It wouldn't be fun at all, they're everywhere, and 3) (this just came to me) why give cachers a chance to get more McToys?? :blink:. Thankfully, I never did follow through. I don't think that locationless caches go against the point of geocaching - they're just a spin-off of the game. If done properly, they can be a lot of fun. I remember how excited I was when I saw the little (6' little) Statue of Liberty that I had driven by a 100 times and realized it was a locationless cache. And where would the Yellow Jeep be without locationless caches!?! So, to answer the question, I think they count as finds because they haven't been spun off into their own section yet. As a side note, at the rate people are predicting geocaching spinoffs, we're going to have a LOT of subdomains for geocaching! (i.e., reverse.geocaching.com, virtual.geocaching.com) ... hey, maybe I'm on to something here!

 

~Jared

Link to comment
Why do people ask stupid questions in this forum? It's also a mystery for me!

Please remember that in the forums there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers. If someone doesn't know an answer then these forums are here for them to come and ask. It may be right there on the site or right on the main page of the site. You can point that out to them but please don't put fellow geocachers down because they happened to miss it.

 

The forums don't have to be combative here. We are all geocachers. Let's help each other out.

Edited by mtn-man
Link to comment

i like locationless. try finding a rock wall in michigan, not easy. try finding an eternal flame when your brother got the only one around. locationless caches make you more aware of your surroundings when you are out somewhere. when i cache with my one brother it is a dog eat dog contest who will claim a locationless when both see it at the same time. i'm still looking for a working grist mill, he got the only one around here when we were caching. some of them are not as easy as they seem.

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...