Jump to content

Rediculious Event: Number Game????


AtoZ

Recommended Posts

Reading on another thread xomeone complained about a mean log entry, but that is another story. But in looking at the poster profile they had 100 events logged for the SAME event. Looking at the Event I it looks redicilous. I thought maybe htey had cache event for which you could claim a find but it was not that it was just abuse. Claiming a find for looking as t stump or climbing stairs etc...

I mean it is rediculius. Okay I guess it is a game and you can play it your way but this is BAD!!!!!!!

Is this valid and I missed something or waht???

Waypoint GCN3XN

 

cheers

Link to comment

I think it is silly, but does it matter?

 

If someone wants to inflate their stats with something like that, how does it effect the rest of us?

 

Personally, if I was at that event I would log the find once, but thats because I like my stats to reflect how many caches I have truly found. However, does anyone else care how many I've found? I doubt it.

Link to comment

I think that if its one event, you claim one "attended". How do you attend an event 50, or 100 times? Do you keep leaving and coming back?

 

If there are 50 event caches there, that's irrelevant.

 

But if there are some people out there who are so obsessed with numbers that they find it necessary to pad them, more power to them. Everyone knows who they are and they are only fooling themselves.

Link to comment

Some events will state that people can log the temporary caches on the event page. Since there is no rule against it, I guess it is OK.

 

I can see why some would want to do it to keep track of all "caches" they have found. At the same time there is the argument that the event is the cache and that event caches are not the same as permanent ones. Hence they should only log the event once.

 

I don't really care. At one event I once logged the event caches on the event page because the organizers decided to allow that. Later I decided I wasn't going to do that in future events and went back and changed them to notes. I also know of an event where the organizers specifically said not to multiple log the event page.

 

In the end I guess it is up to the event organizers and if they are silent on it, then up to the individual people who attend.

Link to comment
Some events will state that people can log the temporary caches on the event page. Since there is no rule against it, I guess it is OK.

 

I can see why some would want to do it to keep track of all "caches" they have found. At the same time there is the argument that the event is the cache and that event caches are not the same as permanent ones. Hence they should only log the event once.

 

I don't really care. At one event I once logged the event caches on the event page because the organizers decided to allow that. Later I decided I wasn't going to do that in future events and went back and changed them to notes. I also know of an event where the organizers specifically said not to multiple log the event page.

 

In the end I guess it is up to the event organizers and if they are silent on it, then up to the individual people who attend.

I understand that but read (name removed to protect the innocent)logs they claim looking at a stump, seeing someone flash them climbing some stairs etc.... It was funny to see this as new team name and they have 2300 cache between them under other names. But it was not for VALID finds even at an event. I dont know maybe after 2000+ finda you dont care any more.

sigh

 

cheers

Edited by AtoZ
Link to comment

I looked at some of the "finders" of the event cache posted above.

 

One of them, who has upwards of 1000 finds has 288 that were event caches. That's 25% of their finds.

 

And those 288 "finds?" They were all logged at one of only three event caches that he attended...

 

Yet another, who had around 4000 finds has 400 or so event caches in their profile. All of those "finds" were logged at one of only four events.

 

Looking at other attendees of that event, I notice patterns very much similar. I guess it's how they "play the game" in their region...

 

I guess it's all about what you get out of the game.

 

But logging between 50-100 finds for an event? I don't care if you found that many temporary caches, that's just going overboard...

 

What do you get out of it? Respect? I dunno...

Edited by TeamK-9
Link to comment
I dont know maybe after 2000+ finda you dont care any more.

sigh

Hey. You're right. I should just quit caching now. :)

 

I'd never log an event cache twice (let alone 100 times) but that's just my decision. I don't compare my count against anyone else's (save for a couple friendly rivalries, of course :) ), so I don't really care if they wanted to log that same event cache 1000 times. I have better things to worry about.

Link to comment
"Valid" means that (1) the cache met the listing site's guidelines, (2) the log owner determines that they have met the requirement to log a find, and (3) the cache owner agrees that the log should stand.

 

Here is a prior discussion on temporary caches at events which may be helpful.

I still agree with Woodsters. If the cache wasn't approved on this site, why on earth would you claim a find for it? :)

 

Can I go claim all my Terracaching and Navicaching finds here too? :)

 

Ooh, I know! How about claiming hides for caches I thought about placing? I can boost my numbers pretty quickly that way!

 

You don't get credit for a "hide" until it's been approved, why claim credit for a find that hasn't been approved either?

Link to comment

I'd be far too embarrased to have logged that many finds on an event, no matter how many temp. caches I found at that event, just doesn't sit right with me.

 

But then again I would never log all the travel bugs that I "touched" or "saw" at an event, that I didn't personally move, and I've seen that done, too.....

Link to comment
"Valid" means that (1) the cache met the listing site's guidelines, (2) the log owner determines that they have met the requirement to log a find, and (3) the cache owner agrees that the log should stand.

 

Here is a prior discussion on temporary caches at events which may be helpful.

I still agree with Woodsters. If the cache wasn't approved on this site, why on earth would you claim a find for it? :)

 

Can I go claim all my Terracaching and Navicaching finds here too? :)

 

Ooh, I know! How about claiming hides for caches I thought about placing? I can boost my numbers pretty quickly that way!

 

You don't get credit for a "hide" until it's been approved, why claim credit for a find that hasn't been approved either?

I agree with Sax. (ACK!, that means I agreed with Woodsters?)

 

If we accept Lep's definition of "valid", then they fail rule #1. They are temp caches and not valid caches as far as GC.com is concerned. I personally would not want finds on my GC account for caches that are not listed on GC.com. Of course, everyone plays the game the way they want, and it doesnt really break any rules (I guess one could argue that since they are not "valid" logs the owner is bound by the guidelines to delete them, but thats pushing it). It also shows once again why when it comes to geocaching, any form of stats must be taken with a grain of salt. It's not the same as baseball when there are set rules on what is a run, what's a home run, what's a strike out, etc.

A GC.com smiley can mean almost anything.

Link to comment

Shouldn't you send your message to the account that hosted the event and make your concern heard? All you'll get here is rabble.

 

rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble.

 

I don't usually correct grammar or spelling, but it is "ridiculous" - which is another form of the word "ridicule" - I too think of it as rediculous in my head and often have to correct the spelling in my posts.

Edited by Jeremy
Link to comment
Shouldn't you send your message to the account that hosted the event and make your concern heard? All you'll get here is rabble.

Did somebody slap you with a pickle or something? You've been awfully sour lately.

Put it another way. Instead of calling people out in the forums and shaking your finger at them, it is more appropriate to take it to the person instead of attacking them here, or someone who can actually do something about whatever issue concerns you. I don't object to bringing up a situation and asking for input, but it is very uncool to say "hey look at what this guy is doing."

 

As for being sour, I've always been sour. I eat sour patch children for breakfast. But that is neither here nor there (and generally distracts from the discussion. How about a PM next time?).

Link to comment
Shouldn't you send your message to the account that hosted the event and make your concern heard? All you'll get here is rabble.

Did somebody slap you with a pickle or something? You've been awfully sour lately.

I don't think Jeremy is sour. Snarky maybe, but not sour.

Link to comment
I don't object to bringing up a situation and asking for input, but it is very uncool to say "hey look at what this guy is doing."

I don't see why, especially if there's not consensus on what he's doing. Hm. Even less if there is consensus, come to think of it. How is this different from "mean logs" or "vanishing Jeep TB's" or...whatever? Either norms are hashed out by the community, or they're delivered by Moses.

 

As for being sour, I've always been sour. I eat sour patch children for breakfast. But that is neither here nor there (and generally distracts from the discussion. How about a PM next time?).

Probably the same reason you didn't reply in PM -- it's a public conversation, and more than thee and me may be interested in the answer.

Link to comment
I don't object to bringing up a situation and asking for input, but it is very uncool to say "hey look at what this guy is doing."

I don't see why, especially if there's not consensus on what he's doing.

Hey. It's just my opinion. You can take it or leave it. I think its rude.

 

How about a PM next time?

Probably the same reason you didn't reply in PM -- it's a public conversation, and more than thee and me may be interested in the answer.

 

Another opinion, but your comments about the tone of my posts detract from the discussion. The on-topic posts tend to stand alone quite fine without this unnecessary banter. That's what the off-topic forum is for.

Edited by Jeremy
Link to comment
Another opinion, but your comments about the tone of my posts detract from the discussion. The on-topic posts tend to stand alone quite fine without this unnecessary banter. That's what the off-topic forum is for.

My bad. I thought a bantering tone could help me make my point without being unpleasantly confrontational. What I actually meant was that I thought dismissing community opinion as "rabble" was inappropriate and rude.

Link to comment

I apologize the rabble comment if you thought it was rude, but the message I was trying to bring across is that the forum users here cannot really do anything about the situation except create a mob and set fire to whoever their current target is - a lot of times without hearing the full story. Not everyone watches South Park but on that show they always show a mob as saying "rabble rabble rabble" because they tend to go where the loudest voice tells them to go.

 

There has been an unsettling increase in the abuses that people are dishing out in both PM and the email program on the site. A lot has to do with posts in these forums that inflame people to write rather vulger and inappropriate messages to other geocachers. It is posts like these that I'd like to see stop. I can guarantee that the targeted member in this topic has received at least one negative email already from it.

Link to comment
Shouldn't you send your message to the account that hosted the event and make your concern heard? All you'll get here is rabble.

Did somebody slap you with a pickle or something? You've been awfully sour lately.

Put it another way. Instead of calling people out in the forums and shaking your finger at them, it is more appropriate to take it to the person instead of attacking them here, or someone who can actually do something about whatever issue concerns you. I don't object to bringing up a situation and asking for input, but it is very uncool to say "hey look at what this guy is doing."

 

As for being sour, I've always been sour. I eat sour patch children for breakfast. But that is neither here nor there (and generally distracts from the discussion. How about a PM next time?).

I am sorry if I seemed to be attacking someone but I was NOT I was attacking an idea or a conept or action. I did not name name, untill a later post and I am sorry for that and will admend it. And yes I did think of writing the event holder and all but it was the idea that this happened I don't care who but I know lots of folks that work for the numbers they have and are prould of it. I guess I had just never imagined or see this happen. But I was NOT attackint indifiduals.

cheers

Link to comment
I am sorry if I seemed to be attacking someone but I was NOT I was attacking an idea or a conept or action.

I think this is still on-topic, so I'll use this case. It may not have been your intention to call out an individual, but your first post points out the cache listing. With a simple search it is easily to pick a target to attack.

 

Generally if there is an issue that can create a target it is better to just talk about your experience without pointing out a specific cache listing or user. Granted with some research people can figure out what you're referencing, but generally it keeps from directly painting targets on individual cachers' heads.

 

(edit: hate my new keyboard)

Edited by Jeremy
Link to comment
Reading on another thread xomeone complained about a mean log entry, but that is another story. But in looking at the poster profile they had 100 events logged for the SAME event. Looking at the Event I it looks redicilous. I thought maybe htey had cache event for which you could claim a find but it was not that it was just abuse. Claiming a find for looking as t stump or climbing stairs etc...

I mean it is rediculius. Okay I guess it is a game and you can play it your way but this is BAD!!!!!!!

Is this valid and I missed something or waht???

Waypoint GCN3XN

 

cheers

Looks like about everyone at the event logged a bunch of finds. This stuff happens. :) Just don't do it yourself. It will make you even fonder of your own accomplishments in this game. This is something I had to come to grips with myself. A lot of fellow cachers I was in awe of by their find counts, I learned were really just a bunch of cheaters. You will get over it, and life will be better. :)

Link to comment

My personal opinion is one event one find. But it's accepted at some level that event only caches should be logged on the event cache page as extra finds. I think it's a sham since those finds are not open to the community, only those who attended the event. But the community says otherwise. (50 % for and 50% against in gross numbers).

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

I've seen a couple LOTEC caches around here to fix the multi-log of event caches. It stands for Log Only Temporary Event Caches so you only have one count for the event and log the temp caches on the LOTEC page. You still get credit for temp caches, which won't end the world, but your event cache stat stays correct, even tho that won't end the world either :)

Link to comment
My personal opinion is one event one find. But it's accepted at some level that event only caches should be logged on the event cache page as extra finds. I think it's a sham since those finds are not open to the community, only those who attended the event. But the community says otherwise. (50 % for and 50% against in gross numbers).

Wow, this is opposite of my last post, but everyone in the world has the opportunity to show up to the event. But I still don't see it as right. :)

Link to comment
I've seen a couple LOTEC caches around here to fix the multi-log of event caches. It stands for Log Only Temporary Event Caches so you only have one count for the event and log the temp caches on the LOTEC page. You still get credit for temp caches, which won't end the world, but your event cache stat stays correct, even tho that won't end the world either :)

How is this any different? Are the LOTEC caches listed on gc.com?

Link to comment

First time I've ever seen this done, but then again I don't usually research other peoples finds to see how they got the numbers.

 

I will agree with Jeremy that this person shouldn't have been called out in the forums by pointing to the event cache in question. The topic could have just as easily been done without singling out any one event.

 

Once again I'll say that people should worry about their own numbers, standards and goals, not everyone elses.

 

El Diablo

Link to comment
I've seen a couple LOTEC caches around here to fix the multi-log of event caches. It stands for Log Only Temporary Event Caches so you only have one count for the event and log the temp caches on the LOTEC page. You still get credit for temp caches, which won't end the world, but your event cache stat stays correct, even tho that won't end the world either  :)

How is this any different? Are the LOTEC caches listed on gc.com?

As far as find counts, it's no different because the LOTEC is on this site. But it does clean up the event page by having just the attended logs on it.

Link to comment

Hehe, I always wanted to do this:

 

Jeremy is right! And he built this website so he knows what system is allowed by what he put in place! If you're going to argue that multiple logs on a single event is wrong, then you're going to have to make Jeremy change his website so it's not allowed! I love the way Jeremy has created this website and if you don't like it you should make your own geocaching website where events can't be logged more than once and then go there and never use this site again!

 

PS - Jeremy, I agree, they need to write the event owner if they want to convince anyone of changing something like this...this post is like the people in that "get involved" PSA looking at a piece of trash on the ground 2 feet from a trash can...

 

"Somebody should do something"

"If my husband were here.."

"Who would do something like this?"

 

:)

Link to comment
I apologize the rabble comment if you thought it was rude, but the message I was trying to bring across is that the forum users here cannot really do anything about the situation except create a mob and set fire to whoever their current target is

I liked the rabble rabble bit.

 

a lot of times without hearing the full story.

 

Ain't that the truth!

Link to comment

I've logged an event more than once. The reason being that there were two distinct locations for the event. A morning meet & greet in a park and an evening gathering at a local pizza place. They were about 2 miles apart. Don't know why they were not just listed as seperate events. I've never logged temp caches at events (I just note them in my log if I found any), but to each his/her own.

Link to comment

I used to log temporary caches at events, but I came to the conclusion that if my finds weren't open for everyone to do then I didn't want to count them. For me this game isn't so much about competition as it's about community. My find is my little part in the story of the existence of that cache. If the "find" is only there for me to pad my numbers, then it's suddenly about "me" instead of being about the cache and the rest of the caching community.

 

Events are opportunities to meet other cachers, not pad my numbers. That's why I "attend" them rather than "find" them....don't you?

 

But I guess it all goes back to Hamlet, "To thine own self be true." Since this isn't a competition I can't hold anyone to the standard I hold myself to or judge them by my standard. Play your game the way it ought to be played. Just have fun, for crying out loud.

 

And as a friend of mine used to often tell me, "Do whatever you think is right."

 

Geez, I always hated that!

 

Bret

Link to comment
First time I've ever seen this done, but then again I don't usually research other peoples finds to see how they got the numbers.

 

I will agree with Jeremy that this person shouldn't have been called out in the forums by pointing to the event cache in question. The topic could have just as easily been done without singling out any one event.

 

Once again I'll say that people should worry about their own numbers, standards and goals, not everyone elses.

 

El Diablo

I agree with what El Diablo said, "Once again I'll say that people should worry about their own numbers, standards and goals, not everyone elses."

Link to comment

Okay I shouldn't have listed the waypoint for the event, hind site is amazing. Okay I was wrong but I was not fingering any individual but just an occorance of individuals. I dont really care but it makes me wonder about some folks. I just didnt know something like this ever happened. Now I have logged caches at events but only because the event holder submitted it as an cache open to all cachers and he said I could or anyone at the event could. But what got me was the fact that the thing people put down was NOT even caches. But again i guess it is a game and so what does it matter but For the folks that have multi K finds that are legit, well it just plants a bad seed but then again.....

cheers

 

Sorry I did not mean to offend anyone, but I was hust agahast(SP).

Link to comment

In the interest of accuracy, the team in question only logged 33 caches at the campout, not 100. The 100 number is from 5 different events. Also, all of their logs were for actual caches, they just did a little wordplay with the names of the caches. For example, the log about "walking down steps for a find" referred to the cache called "12 Steps", that was near the bottom of a flight of steps going to the lake.

 

I attended that event. There were over 70 caches at that event. Real caches- almost all far off road- no parking lot micro's here. There were several multi's that only counted as one cache. There was even one multi that ended with an underwater cache. I walked over 18 miles that day, and found 56 myself.

 

Yes, I did log them. I loaded coordinates in my GPS, walked anywhere from .15 to .25 miles through the woods to the coordinates, found a cache, and logged it.

 

Just like all of the other caches that I have found, with the exeption of the urban micro's, where I didn't have the walking or the woods part.

 

Do I feel that I "cheated" or "padded my numbers" by logging them? No. To me, my stats would be far more innacurate if I hadn't logged them. The only innacuracy would be that they show as "attended" instead of "found", but there is no way to log a "found" at an event.

 

Like I said, I worked just as hard, if not harder, for those caches than I have on most of my other finds. I guess I feel that a cache is a cache, whether it is a Micro in a Wal-mart parking lot, a 10 miles each way 5/5, or a cache at an event.

 

As far as mailing the Cache owners, that would be the WI Geocachers Association. Logging the caches was discussed amongst the membership, and it was decided that it was appropriate to log each cache.

Edited by Docapi
Link to comment

Here is a very old thread where the idea of posting event caches multiple times on the page was debated. I think the thread brought out good points on both sides of the issue.

 

It is funny for me to go back and read it. At the time I really advocated for multiple logging, and I still really don't care if people do that (assuming the event people don't care). But around a year or so after, I did change my mind as far as my own logging was concerned and went back and changed my whopping 3-4 multiple logs for event caches to notes. In the end, and over time, I decided I agreed with the people I debated against in that thread! Go figure... :)

 

But even though I changed my mind, I think the points made by me there and by Docapi in this thread are valid. So in the end it comes down to cache owner/event organizer wishes and personal feelings about it. I am not about to judge someone else's way they play the game unless I think they truly "cheated" on a cache that I own. I can see why people view event caches as "caches" and want to keep track of that. Yet obviously I also changed my mind and decided that you "attend" an event and decided to personally not log temp event caches. There is definitely room for varying beliefs on the issue. I also have no problems with people being numbers oriented. Here is a thread I posted once on that. If people are having fun, then I am happy! That makes it all good for me! :)

Link to comment
I tend to use smarmy over snarky.

I might call you a lot of things, Jeremy, but smarmy is not one of them.

 

Smarmy == oily. You are far too straightforward.

I wouldn't say Jeremy was effusive or gushing. He seemed rather restrained when I saw him. Maybe over emotional here in the forums.

Link to comment
I don't think Jeremy is sour. Snarky maybe, but not sour.

I tend to use smarmy over snarky.

Hmmmm. Snarky is a good word though. My Dad used to use that alot. Good word...... It sounds nicer and rolls off easier. Snarky.... I might have to start using that word. :)

Link to comment

from my other forum that i posted

not to bash jeremy for making this website but its something that might catch up to all of us as time gos by

 

and i don't think the user that put the event cache was to happy about getting so many emails over and over and over from the same users (NOT POINTING FINGERS AT CACHERS!!)

i meen that might have been a log every sec!! dang! lots of email

 

what i am trying to get at is that cachers need to log there finds in the event

on the events page and the caches that they found on the cache page not both

 

like put it so

 

like i found the "rock cache"

and 20 other caches

 

i log the "rock cache" and the 20 other caches in one attend log NOT 21 attend logs (thats over doing it)

 

and then i log each cache on there cache page

 

so i don't end up with 42 finds in a day

 

And i am not a person that gos on numbers of finds.

 

But there are some cachers out there

that have bashed me due to me not having as many finds as them

and saying i am a bad Geocacher for it!!! And that they whant to take my rights of placing a geocache away till i have more finds

( i know that will never happen do to this is a game and jeremy would have done it long ago if he wanted too)

And i don't have thin skin about it i just brush there comments off and go about my job of playing the game at my own speed!!! bad_boy_animated.gif

 

I meen yes there is no rules on logging more then once on a cache

but i meen come on use some common sence on this one

its a game!!!

If you are only in for the Number of caches you can find then this is not the game for you.

 

But if you are that type please don't flood the logs as a cache owner i get a email every time you log my cache

and getting 20 emails from the same cache by the same user

is not cool

signalmad.gif

 

COME ON PEOPLE ITS JUST A GAME!!!!

DON'T LOSE THE MEENING OF HAVING FUN AT IT!!!

HAPPY GEOCACHING ALL!!!

 

chuck...

Edited by Charles Iverson
Link to comment
I don't think Jeremy is sour. Snarky maybe, but not sour.

I tend to use smarmy over snarky.

Hmmmm. Snarky is a good word though. My Dad used to use that alot. Good word...... It sounds nicer and rolls off easier. Snarky.... I might have to start using that word. :)

I had a Snark moped (about 25yrs ago).

 

florida14med_814.jpg

 

Almost as cool as a Vespa. :)

Link to comment
...There has been an unsettling increase in the abuses that people are dishing out in both PM and the email program on the site....I can guarantee that the targeted member in this topic has received at least one negative email already from it.

 

Jeremy, a person could be forgiven for inferring, from your response, that you monitor private messages. Please clarify. Thanks.

 

EDIT--as someone pointed out below, abusive PMs can be forwarded to abuse@geocaching.com. Duh!

Edited by reveritt
Link to comment

I invite everyone to look at my profile. Not just because I'm about to pass Mr. 0, the #2 find leader of Central Ohio, either.

 

I logged the 2004 Geocache-Athalon 8 times because it kicked me up one side and down the other with 8 multis. But, it shows up in my profile and total as only one find.

 

I was talking yesterday with someone who said that as they reached 1000 finds, they started deleting all of the "fluff" from their logs so they could stay at 999 until he could do it with friends. I was considering that and took a look at these particular logs, but since they don't contribute to my total, I won't put forthe the effort.

 

Is there something differant about the logs on this recent event?

 

[Edit: Nope. I just assumed that all the pages counted 20 strong. Hmmm... I now have some converting to do down the road. I'm still proud of those finds, though. I turned 30 and could still keep up with the 27 year old whipper-snappers! Just remember: "It's not how old you are/feel/want to be it's how old your friends think you are." Mine seem to think I'm a little past 80.]

Edited by Bjorn74
Link to comment
...There has been an unsettling increase in the abuses that people are dishing out in both PM and the email program on the site....I can guarantee that the targeted member in this topic has received at least one negative email already from it.

 

Jeremy, a person could be forgiven for inferring, from your response, that you monitor private messages. Please clarify. Thanks.

I inferred that people forwarded the messages to abuse@geocaching.com

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...