Found Vs Attended On Event Caches

[+ChileHead]

Was removing the option to find an event cache recently removed and replaced with "attended"?

 

Often we have temporary event caches set up, and an unofficial protocol is to post a "find" for each of the event caches you found (meaning you'll have > 1 find on the event cache).

 

Now you really can't do that anymore, but I suppose you could attend the cache multiple times.

[+Prime Suspect]

Good idea. That gives it the capabilities that CITO events already had. You've now got a "will attend" type log to indicate your intentions, and "attended" to show you were there.

 

Let's face it, there's really not much involved in finding most events. I always thought getting a smilie for it was kind of silly.

[+Jamie Z]

Often we have temporary event caches set up, and an unofficial protocol is to post a "find" for each of the event caches you found (meaning you'll have > 1 find on the event cache).

Perhaps I shouldn't have an opinion on how you log your finds, but that just seems weird to me.

 

Those temporary event caches likely rarely meet gc.com listing requirements. Why would credit be given for finding them?

 

If you log an event, that's counted. Anything you do at the event falls under that find.

 

I haven't tested it recently, but I was disappointed when DNFs were removed from event caches. GPSax often talks about his event no-find, and I very nearly had one myself when I couldn't find the place until the last minute. I'd like to think I could accurately log my experience if I failed to find an event.

 

Jamie

[Keystone]

Linky link to announcement of the change.

[+shunra]

Replacing the 'Found it' by 'Attended' is good, but since they took away tje 'didm't find it' option as well, I think a 'missed it' log option should be added.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Good idea. That gives it the capabilities that CITO events already had. You've now got a "will attend" type log to indicate your intentions, and "attended" to show you were there.

 

Let's face it, there's really not much involved in finding most events. I always thought getting a smilie for it was kind of silly.

 

You still get a smilie (altho it looks a little different from a 'normal' one) and it does count in your total found. I like the idea. If that is the same thing that will happen with the new proposed log type for LC's, 'found a waypoint', I'm for it.

 

Perhaps I shouldn't have an opinion on how you log your finds, but that just seems weird to me.

 

Those temporary event caches likely rarely meet gc.com listing requirements. Why would credit be given for finding them?

 

If you log an event, that's counted. Anything you do at the event falls under that find.

 

I guess the reason that you are able to do it is because the owner(s) of the cache have the final say if anyone can claim multiple finds on it, not this website or anyone else.

 

I have attended a few events and have never done this until recently. That event had 2 distinct meeting spots, one in the morning and one in the evening, so I logged both. When I started out I never logged the temporary ones at the events, and even after I learned it was permissable, I still don't. I also don't log multiple finds on other caches when able to do so. Not for any other reason than to keep consistent in the way I log. If I did do it I would have about 15-20 more finds than my records show. But that's just me. I have no problem with others doing it, as long as they DID make the find as allowed by the cache owner.

[+ChileHead]

Perhaps I shouldn't have an opinion on how you log your finds, but that just seems weird to me.

 

Those temporary event caches likely rarely meet gc.com listing requirements. Why would credit be given for finding them?

 

If you log an event, that's counted. Anything you do at the event falls under that find.

 

I guess the reason that you are able to do it is because the owner(s) of the cache have the final say if anyone can claim multiple finds on it, not this website or anyone else.

I post multiple finds on event caches because

(1) it's convention, at least around here, for the few event caches I've been to anyway

(2) it allows you to post separate comments to distinguish between the different event caches in the logs.

(3) you get credit for the work you've done searching for caches (no, "it's not about the numbers", but I like knowing how many caches I've found for my own personal reasons).

 

Yes, it's true that many wouldn't meet the ordinary standards. Sometime's that is what is fun about it! At one event, there was a temp cache set up "That's just wrong", which was set up < 50 feet from another cache, contained food items, cache container was a paper bag, bag was set up on a table with a chair in the woods, etc, etc ...

[+Blaidd-Drwg]

Just my $.02. I recently attended one of our statewide events. During the Event, there were three separate games, each of which had it's own cache page. Most folks logged once for each game they participated in, even though there were about 20 caches in each event. Most of these would easily been approved as permanent caches, with only a couple being too close to others. In my mind, logging an event cache multiple times to comment on each cache there is just running up numbers. But again, it's just my opinion.

[+9Key]

To address Team Madog - in the future only one event will be posted, Oklahoma or not.

 

BOT >

I totally agree with Jamie Z on this. If you attended the event you get one Find, temp caches or not.

 

I've allowed multiple finds on one of my recent events, but only because I did not specifiy otherwise before the event was posted.

 

Thank you Ground Speak!

[+9Key]

you get credit for the work you've done searching for caches (no, "it's not about the numbers", but I like knowing how many caches I've found for my own personal reasons).

If that were true then you wouldn't log Finds ~ post Logs. Or keep a paper notebook. In this case, Ground Speak just moved you over to a paper logbook and a pen.

 

There's so many excuses about how you're "not competitive" and its "Not About The Numbers" that its become a joke.

Be serious for a minute ~ if you didn't care about how many finds you have, would you log a temporary cache placed for an event as a Find?

[+Commander Bob]

There's so many excuses about how you're "not competitive" and its "Not About The Numbers" that its become a joke.

Be serious for a minute ~ if you didn't care about how many finds you have, would you log a temporary cache placed for an event as a Find? 

To be serious for a minute, does the fact that it's a temporary cache make any difference at all? Given your reasoning, would you log ANY caches at all? I for one have no problem with temporary event caches counted as finds. Most of the events I have attended have far better temporary caches than a lot of permanent caches I have done. Events caches here are a place where creative hiders can showcase their talents. Many creative hides, because of their limited life expectancy, are perfect for temporary events. For example one cache had a wireless doorbell attached to a trailmarker signpost. You rang the bell and had to listen for the sound coming from the direction of the cache location. A great idea, but battery life, mechanical failure, etc. would prevent this from lasting very long as a permanent cache. Other caches that just don't have the durability to last, yet make for extremely clever hides, are great for the limited life expectancy of events. I am still amazed at how many people object to this practice. Using the excuse that event caches are just a way to increase numbers, and how they are not interested in numbers, yet seem overly concerned about how others count their numbers. If your numbers don't matter to you, why would my numbers matter to you?

[CoyoteRed]

This is a curious move. I can understand the move to make the log more accurate, but this does affect the logging of event caches.

 

It's my core belief that if you found the cache and can verify that find, then it counts. You should be able to keep your find count on this site as accurate as possible and the only way to log an event cache is either on the event itself or on one of your own caches. The latter being a major invitation for confusion. (I guess you could log some other arbitrary cache, but that would cause even more confusion.)

 

I really don't care if a cache is "up to gc.com standards" or even if it's listed here, the find counts. Considering the cache was part of a gc.com listed event I see the most appropriate place to log it would be on that event page.

 

PS: no one can use the "you just want to rack up your find count" argument with me considering I rarely hunt event caches.

[ju66l3r]

Agreed with CR but for different reasons. If this site is not concerned about generating find statistics, then what matter is it that an event log is an "attended" instead of a "found".

 

It's simply semantics if some greater purpose (such as statistics or filtering) is not served...and I do not remember the last time the "To Do" queue was pushed back in order to overhaul the code for a semantical googaw.

 

If this isn't to further the foundation for statistics or something greater, I'd rather the company spent its time talking to Buxley's website or implementing one of the many other *useful* changes that people have discussed here (but keep getting kicked to the rear...so that we can "attend" events instead of "find" them).

[Jeremy]

You attend an event. You find a cache. It doesn't seem too difficult.

[+RJFerret]

Here's the flip side, locally there's a monthly recurring get together but the hiders stipulate only ONE find even if you attend each month.

 

Whoops! Now folks who attended again logged such and have incurred multiple finds without realizing it.

 

Now obviously, nobody cares--but it has created the opposite condition of the sentiments expressed above.

 

On the flip side, although I hadn't chimed in on this change ('cause again, who cares?) Removing "Not found" from event cache pages is odd as I've seen that occur and that, at least, seems very straightforward.

 

To paraphrase Jeremy, "You tried to attend an event. You didn't find a cache. It doesn't seem too difficult."

 

But again, these things are trivial in my book.

 

Enjoy,

 

Randy

[Jeremy]

Here's the flip side, locally there's a monthly recurring get together but the hiders stipulate only ONE find even if you attend each month.

So write a note after you logged an "attended" log.

[CoyoteRed]

I never did get the whole attend-an-event-get-credit-for-a-find thing, anyway.

[+TotemLake]

I'm obviously in the minority, but if I take the coordinates, and find the location based on those coordinates and signed a log proving I was there... then that counted as a Find in my book. Some events are none to easy to find if you don't know the area all that well.

[+KC0GRN]

I like the idea of leaving it as is. If you restrict this and that people will get cranky. Not to mention the simpler the better. I like to think of geocaching more as a game that you can choose the finer points of how you want to play it. Don't like locationless? don't do em, Don't like virtuals? Don't do em, Don't like Temp Event caches? Don't do em However don't prohibit them from people that enjoy em, because what you get out of the game is what makes it fun. And if someone wants to argue about find numbers... let em I guess, personally I don't care if someone boasts about 1,000 traditional cache finds or 10,000 virtuals, etc.

[ju66l3r]

You attend an event. You find a cache. It doesn't seem too difficult.

I guess you have some work cut out for you then.

 

The following are needed:

 

ju66l3r was "Wow'd" by XYZ Virtual cache.

 

ju66l3r "Scooby-Doo'd" the XYZ Mystery cache.

 

ju66l3r "positioned myself" at the XYZ benchmark.

 

 

[+BlueDeuce]

You attend an event. You find a cache. It doesn't seem too difficult.

I guess you have some work cut out for you then.

 

The following are needed:

 

ju66l3r was "Wow'd" by XYZ Virtual cache.

 

ju66l3r "Scooby-Doo'd" the XYZ Mystery cache.

 

ju66l3r "positioned myself" at the XYZ benchmark.

 

 

Don't forget to attend to your caches. They need the up-keep.

 

Actually, along with events, I have never found a meeting or church service, I have attended a few. (usually against my will)

Edited November 12, 2004 by 11 After

[Jeremy]

ju66l3r "positioned myself" at the XYZ benchmark.

It would be positioned him or herself.