Jump to content

Rediculious Event: Number Game????


AtoZ

Recommended Posts

You folks don't see me here much any more. These forums are taken OT way too quickly without resolving any issues presented.

 

Getting back to the issues at hand ~

 

100 or more cache logs at one event? - show me

The cachers pointed out have 100 event logs, but this is for a total of five events, take another look at their profile, page one lists only one of those events.

 

Logging temporary caches? This is an issue that has no resolution.

One of the cachers at the WGA event in question logged 65 caches for 20+ hours of caching at the event; cachers were on the trails Friday evening, all day Saturday, Saturday night and early Sunday morning. The park is over 1000 acres in size and boasts over 17 miles of hiking trails. There were about a half dozen caches available Friday, about fifty temporary caches available Saturday and about a dozen more available Saturday night. We used the entire park for the event, which was open to all comers. We frequently see cachers from Illinois, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri and occasionally Texas at our Wisconsin events. The quality of the caches at these events rivals the permanent caches we have seen in the 14 states we have cached in.

 

Some cachers logged every temp they found, some went home with only a count of one event attended. It was their choice. I would prefer to see only permanent caches in our game; I would prefer to see only ammo boxes, only unique locations, and only short walks on level terrain. These are my preferences. But, not all caches fit my preferences. I play the game as it is laid before me and create caches as I like to see them. Please correct me if I am critical of how others play this game, I would do nothing to take their fun from them.

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

I had completely forgotten about that possibility...apologies, Jeremy.

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.

What's the difference between caches at the event (that aren't listed here) and caches listed on another site (that aren't listed here)?

 

Caches listed on another site are "real" caches too, but would you claim finds on them here?

 

Whether you go to an Event Cache and mingle with other geocachers, or find a bunch of temporary caches, you should claim one attended log for the event. Why? Because you only found one cache that is listed on this site. The temporary caches are part of the event. You get credit for them just for attending the event. Sure, you might have more fun at the event if you find a bunch of temp. caches with everyone else, but how much fun equals one smiley? Do you have the same amount of fun on a 5/5 cache as you do a parking lot micro? Should you get to log more smilies on a harder cache? Sorry, the site isn't setup to take into account how much fun you had on a cache so you only get one smilie per cache, even if it's a 1000 stage multi and you're the FTF.

Link to comment
Whether you go to an Event Cache and mingle with other geocachers, or find a bunch of temporary caches, you should claim one attended log for the event. Why? Because you only found one cache that is listed on this site. The temporary caches are part of the event. You get credit for them just for attending the event. Sure, you might have more fun at the event if you find a bunch of temp. caches with everyone else, but how much fun equals one smiley? Do you have the same amount of fun on a 5/5 cache as you do a parking lot micro? Should you get to log more smilies on a harder cache? Sorry, the site isn't setup to take into account how much fun you had on a cache so you only get one smilie per cache, even if it's a 1000 stage multi and you're the FTF.[/color]

Oh give it a rest. If they wanted to log 1000 finds on an event, how is that hurting you?

 

People need to mind their own business and let others play how they want

Link to comment

I went to the Wilderness Center event last Fall, and the cache owners were not aware that you could log the event, but they quickly got out a log book and everyone signed and we all (I think) logged the event. Then there was one temp. virt which could never get approved, and I think most of us claimed that by logging the event again. As I recall, all of the rest were legal caches. Why are all of these temporary caches just temporary? Are they too close? What rules do they violate?

 

And, IF someone IS "cheating," so what?

Link to comment
I went to the Wilderness Center event last Fall, and the cache owners were not aware that you could log the event, but they quickly got out a log book and everyone signed and we all (I think) logged the event.  Then there was one temp. virt which could never get approved, and I think most of us claimed that by logging the event again.  As I recall, all of the rest were legal caches.  Why are all of these temporary caches just temporary?  Are they too close?  What rules do they violate?

 

And, IF someone IS "cheating," so what?

 

Some caches are temporary due to they are to close to other caches or are just put there for the event

during an event and then after the event they are taken down or some become placed caches and are posted on the site for users to log

 

But if they aren't listed on gc.com as a listed cache, I don't think you should get a found smiley for them

so that can go in to cheating if they do log the cache like what happend in this case

Edited by Charles Iverson
Link to comment

It's interesting how many other geocachers want to invent their own rules for the game. The fact is, there are almost no rules... Don't trespass, don't bury your cache, etc. This is one of the greatest assets of the sport- we have the option to do what we want to!

 

This is not a case of a geocacher who is cheating. This event was held by the Wisconsin Geocaching Association. This is an association of over 700 members who have done great things with the state DNR and other land managers to make Wisconsin the most geocaching friendly state in the Midwest.

 

Since the first WGA sponsored event in 2001, attendees have been given the option to log the finding of temporary caches on the event's cache page. This practice has been debated by WGA members several times, with the final decision being that everyone can make their own decision as to how they choose to log.

 

These are logs for caches- real caches that are just as or more challenging than those posted with their own cache page. Each of this caches are worthy of their own cache page, but because they are not "permanent" caches, posting them is against Groundspeak's guidelines for posting a cache.

 

There is a reason this seems odd to many of you- that reason is because you are not here, doing things the way they have always been done. If you look at the cache page for ANY event cache that has been held in Wisconsin, you will see that it is indeed, completely normal here.

Link to comment
I went to the Wilderness Center event last Fall, and the cache owners were not aware that you could log the event, but they quickly got out a log book and everyone signed and we all (I think) logged the event.  Then there was one temp. virt which could never get approved, and I think most of us claimed that by logging the event again.  As I recall, all of the rest were legal caches.  Why are all of these temporary caches just temporary?  Are they too close?  What rules do they violate?

 

And, IF someone IS "cheating," so what?

 

Caches are temporary due to they are to close to other caches or are just put there for the event

during an event and then after the event they are taken down or some become placed caches and are posted on the site for users to log

Actually, caches are supposed to be permanent, according to the cache hiding rules.

 

Cache Permanence

 

When you report a cache on the Geocaching.com web site, geocachers should (and will) expect the cache to be there for a realistic and extended period of time. Therefore, caches that have the goal to move (“traveling caches”), or temporary caches (caches hidden for less than 3 months or for events) most likely will not be listed. If you wish to hide caches for an event, bring printouts to the event and hand them out there.

 

 

in my view these temp caches at events are nothing more than "number inflaters", that are removed when the even is over. If you miss the event, then you miss the 50 temp caches.

 

Based on the way I play the game, I only log events once. During the day, before the event starts, I find "real" caches that I haven't found before.

 

No temp caches for me.

Edited by Kit Fox
Link to comment
It's interesting how many other geocachers want to invent their own rules for the game. The fact is, there are almost no rules... Don't trespass, don't bury your cache, etc. This is one of the greatest assets of the sport- we have the option to do what we want to!

 

This is not a case of a geocacher who is cheating. This event was held by the Wisconsin Geocaching Association. This is an association of over 700 members who have done great things with the state DNR and other land managers to make Wisconsin the most geocaching friendly state in the Midwest.

 

Since the first WGA sponsored event in 2001, attendees have been given the option to log the finding of temporary caches on the event's cache page. This practice has been debated by WGA members several times, with the final decision being that everyone can make their own decision as to how they choose to log.

 

These are logs for caches- real caches that are just as or more challenging than those posted with their own cache page. Each of this caches are worthy of their own cache page, but because they are not "permanent" caches, posting them is against Groundspeak's guidelines for posting a cache.

 

There is a reason this seems odd to many of you- that reason is because you are not here, doing things the way they have always been done. If you look at the cache page for ANY event cache that has been held in Wisconsin, you will see that it is indeed, completely normal here.

I have nothing against them counting their finds from the event. The issue here is should they count them on geocaching.com?

 

You don't count your navicaches here

you don't count your terracaches here

you don't count your geodashing points here

benchmarks aren't included with your finds

 

Why should any cache that is not listed on this site be included with your stats on this site?

Link to comment
"Geowoodstock III" "Where it's all about the numbers"

 

Don't think they are really going to listen to any logic about temperary caches not actually being loggable gc.com caches.

FYI every cache at GeowoodstockIII was and still is a perm. GC.com listed cache... know your facts before making assumptions.

Link to comment
It's interesting how many other geocachers want to invent their own rules for the game. The fact is, there are almost no rules... Don't trespass, don't bury your cache, etc. This is one of the greatest assets of the sport- we have the option to do what we want to!

 

This is not a case of a geocacher who is cheating. This event was held by the Wisconsin Geocaching Association. This is an association of over 700 members who have done great things with the state DNR and other land managers to make Wisconsin the most geocaching friendly state in the Midwest.

 

Since the first WGA sponsored event in 2001, attendees have been given the option to log the finding of temporary caches on the event's cache page. This practice has been debated by WGA members several times, with the final decision being that everyone can make their own decision as to how they choose to log.

 

These are logs for caches- real caches that are just as or more challenging than those posted with their own cache page. Each of this caches are worthy of their own cache page, but because they are not "permanent" caches, posting them is against Groundspeak's guidelines for posting a cache.

 

There is a reason this seems odd to many of you- that reason is because you are not here, doing things the way they have always been done. If you look at the cache page for ANY event cache that has been held in Wisconsin, you will see that it is indeed, completely normal here.

well when i hear it from a geocacher from there it sounds better

but the logs are being made at a event and i don't see why you would whant to log all of the caches that you find at it on the event site

 

and make it so don't don't know if it was a cache or a event that you found

 

your group might ask jeremy about getting your own cache type icon

so others that are not aware of what you are doing in you events

and your events might get bigger if that happens a new cache type toget

Link to comment
If you look at the cache page for ANY event cache that has been held in Wisconsin, you will see that it is indeed, completely normal here.

This is the weird part. Logging an event multiple times is not an "individual" thing, but rather a regional, or group thing.

 

There have been small numbr of events in my area which included some temporary caches. I attended an event in Alabama where there were some temporary caches. To my knowledge, no one logged any of those events more than once.

 

Yet we see this event hosted in WI, and I could point to events in other regions which are commonly logged multiple times. They're not logged multiple times by one guy, but by most or all of the attendees.

 

What makes this phenomenon such a regional thing, and not really up to each individual?

 

A local cacher attended an event elsewhere in the state, and he told me that when he got there, the host got up and explained (among other things) to the group what everyone had to do in order to log that event eight or ten times.

 

It seems that logging an event multiple times requires a group effort.

 

Jamie

Link to comment

It's been awhile since I've posted here as well... These forums seem to give nothing but headaches caused by the overall negativity and "rabbling"... but I digress.

 

The WGA has hosted events for nearly five years now. They have always allowed their temp caches to be logged by attendees. It has never been a requirement, only an option for those who wish to keep track of the number of finds they have. (Yes, it is about the numbers...) As Cathunter said, this has been a topic of heated discussion more than once.

 

The WGA holds no opinion one way or the other and allows each atendee to log their caches how they like. This is the right of the cache owner. I have done multi's where the owner has allowed the finder to log each stage as a find. How is this any different? I have done caches that have included an unlisted Bonus Cache that could be logged as well. How is this any different? Someone mentioned the LOTEC listings... How is this any different?

 

Having hidden several of the caches at this event, I can vouch for the fact that these caches were of equal or greater quality than any of the caches that are found outside of this event. It has been mentioned that they should not be logged because they are not specifically listed here. These caches meet every physical requirement of any other cache listed on this site. Jeremy has given us no way to recognize these event caches here, as is his right. He has however not forbidden us from recognizing them on the event page either. The question has been asked and answered that we are free to log our events however we would like, just as any else is. Until it is mandated by TPTB otherwise, we'll play the game our way, you play it yours.

 

I now return you to your regularily scheduled banter.

 

- Jeff

 

Team GeoPink

Link to comment
Having hidden several of the caches at this event, I can vouch for the fact that these caches were of equal or greater quality than any of the caches that are found outside of this event. It has been mentioned that they should not be logged because they are not specifically listed here. These caches meet every physical requirement of any other cache listed on this site. Jeremy has given us no way to recognize these event caches here, as is his right. He has however not forbidden us from recognizing them on the event page either. The question has been asked and answered that we are free to log our events however we would like, just as any else is. Until it is mandated by TPTB otherwise, we'll play the game our way, you play it yours.

 

I now return you to your regularily scheduled banter.

 

- Jeff

 

Team GeoPink

That same could be said for caches listed on other sites though, that they meet every guideline for listing on geocaching.com.

 

However, because they aren't listed here I don't get credit here.

Link to comment

your group might ask jeremy about getting your own cache type icon

so others that are not aware of what you are doing in you events can join in.

and your events might get bigger if that happens and there will be a new cache type toget!!!

 

edit: darn keyboard

Edited by Charles Iverson
Link to comment
Having hidden several of the caches at this event, I can vouch for the fact that these caches were of equal or greater quality than any of the caches that are found outside of this event.  It has been mentioned that they should not be logged because they are not specifically listed here.  These caches meet every physical requirement of any other cache listed on this site.  Jeremy has given us no way to recognize these event caches here, as is his right.  He has however not forbidden us from recognizing them on the event page either.  The question has been asked and answered that we are free to log our events however we would like, just as any else is.  Until it is mandated by TPTB otherwise, we'll play the game our way, you play it yours.

 

I now return you to your regularily scheduled banter.

 

- Jeff

 

Team GeoPink

That same could be said for caches listed on other sites though, that they meet every guideline for listing on geocaching.com.

 

However, because they aren't listed here I don't get credit here.

Interesting how you've only responded to the portion of my post which suited your prior argument's template. I'm also interested to hear your response to the paragraph prior to the point you began to quote me...

Link to comment
It's been awhile since I've posted here as well... These forums seem to give nothing but headaches caused by the overall negativity and "rabbling"... but I digress.

 

The WGA has hosted events for nearly five years now. They have always allowed their temp caches to be logged by attendees. It has never been a requirement, only an option for those who wish to keep track of the number of finds they have. (Yes, it is about the numbers...) As Cathunter said, this has been a topic of heated discussion more than once.

 

The WGA holds no opinion one way or the other and allows each atendee to log their caches how they like. This is the right of the cache owner. I have done multi's where the owner has allowed the finder to log each stage as a find. How is this any different? I have done caches that have included an unlisted Bonus Cache that could be logged as well. How is this any different? Someone mentioned the LOTEC listings... How is this any different?

 

Having hidden several of the caches at this event, I can vouch for the fact that these caches were of equal or greater quality than any of the caches that are found outside of this event. It has been mentioned that they should not be logged because they are not specifically listed here. These caches meet every physical requirement of any other cache listed on this site. Jeremy has given us no way to recognize these event caches here, as is his right. He has however not forbidden us from recognizing them on the event page either. The question has been asked and answered that we are free to log our events however we would like, just as any else is. Until it is mandated by TPTB otherwise, we'll play the game our way, you play it yours.

 

I now return you to your regularily scheduled banter.

 

- Jeff

 

Team GeoPink

I started reading this with a "who cares" opinion but am coming out with the opinion that

 

an event should only be logged once.

caches that are not listed on this site should not be logged as a find

 

It doesn't matter the distance, how difficult or well thought out the caches were. if they are not listed here for everyone to log, they should not be listed as a find.

 

an event should only be logged once.

If a GC.com cache is found, it should be logged accordingly.

 

If the temp caches are so important, why not just write one long "attended" or "Found" log stating you found the other caches, why post 30+ logs? It just doesn't make sense unless your trying to pad your numbers.

 

The game does have rules, some of them go without saying, some are just common sense.

 

Dave

Link to comment
your group might ask jeremy about getting your own cache type icon

so others that are not aware of what you are doing in you events

and your events might get bigger if that happens and a new cache type toget!!!

While this is a nice idea, I cannot imagine Jeremy going through the effort of creating a log type only for one area's way of playing, especially when the way its being handled works just fine now. If there were an overwhleming request from this community as a whole, though, I would imagine he'd think about.

 

Until then we'll just have to pipe up here every couple of months to "piss out the fires" started by those who don't understand the way we play. It's ok, I don't understand some aspects of the way others play either...

Link to comment
Having hidden several of the caches at this event, I can vouch for the fact that these caches were of equal or greater quality than any of the caches that are found outside of this event.  It has been mentioned that they should not be logged because they are not specifically listed here.  These caches meet every physical requirement of any other cache listed on this site.  Jeremy has given us no way to recognize these event caches here, as is his right.  He has however not forbidden us from recognizing them on the event page either.  The question has been asked and answered that we are free to log our events however we would like, just as any else is.  Until it is mandated by TPTB otherwise, we'll play the game our way, you play it yours.

 

I now return you to your regularily scheduled banter.

 

- Jeff

 

Team GeoPink

That same could be said for caches listed on other sites though, that they meet every guideline for listing on geocaching.com.

 

However, because they aren't listed here I don't get credit here.

Interesting how you've only responded to the portion of my post which suited your prior argument's template. I'm also interested to hear your response to the paragraph prior to the point you began to quote me...

The rest of your post had nothing to do with this site, it's about your local group. Logging these temporary finds on your local group's website would be a better option than logging them here.

 

You can also use Keenpeople.com to keep track of caches you've found on all sites combined. That way you can log temporary caches for events, geocaches, terracaches, navicaches, your own private caches, etc.

 

Stats on this site should only reflect caches found on this site.

Edited by Team GPSaxophone
Link to comment
your group might ask jeremy about getting your own cache type icon

so others that are not aware of what you are doing in you events can join in.

and your events might get bigger if that happens and there will be a new cache type toget!!!

 

edit: darn keyboard

They have, I believe. As stated earlier, this has been a MAJOR dicussion here in WI.

 

I have logged WI events in both ways -- one log for the event only, and multiple for each temporary cache.

 

At a lot of our events, temporary caches are placed with an agreement with the State Park that the caches will be removed at the end of the event. Would love if they could be permanent, but we want to have a good relationship with park managers.

 

Bec

Link to comment
Having hidden several of the caches at this event, I can vouch for the fact that these caches were of equal or greater quality than any of the caches that are found outside of this event.  It has been mentioned that they should not be logged because they are not specifically listed here.  These caches meet every physical requirement of any other cache listed on this site.  Jeremy has given us no way to recognize these event caches here, as is his right.  He has however not forbidden us from recognizing them on the event page either.  The question has been asked and answered that we are free to log our events however we would like, just as any else is.  Until it is mandated by TPTB otherwise, we'll play the game our way, you play it yours.

 

I now return you to your regularily scheduled banter.

 

- Jeff

 

Team GeoPink

That same could be said for caches listed on other sites though, that they meet every guideline for listing on geocaching.com.

 

However, because they aren't listed here I don't get credit here.

Interesting how you've only responded to the portion of my post which suited your prior argument's template. I'm also interested to hear your response to the paragraph prior to the point you began to quote me...

The rest of your post had nothing to do with this site, it's about your local group. Logging these temporary finds on your local group's website would be a better option than logging them here.

 

You can also use Keenpeople.com to keep track of caches you've found on all sites combined. That way you can log temporary caches for events, geocaches, terracaches, navicaches, your own private caches, etc.

 

Stats on this site should only reflect caches found on this site.

The WGA holds no opinion one way or the other and allows each atendee to log their caches how they like. This is the right of the cache owner. I have done multi's where the owner has allowed the finder to log each stage as a find. How is this any different? I have done caches that have included an unlisted Bonus Cache that could be logged as well. How is this any different? Someone mentioned the LOTEC listings... How is this any different?

 

The above paragraph has everything to do with this site, and nothing specific to our area. I can't imagine that these scenarios haven't come up elsewhere in the country. In fact I know the LOTEC issue is one that has shown up elsewhere.

 

Again I ask, How is this any different?

Link to comment
Having hidden several of the caches at this event, I can vouch for the fact that these caches were of equal or greater quality than any of the caches that are found outside of this event.  It has been mentioned that they should not be logged because they are not specifically listed here.  These caches meet every physical requirement of any other cache listed on this site.  Jeremy has given us no way to recognize these event caches here, as is his right.  He has however not forbidden us from recognizing them on the event page either.  The question has been asked and answered that we are free to log our events however we would like, just as any else is.  Until it is mandated by TPTB otherwise, we'll play the game our way, you play it yours.

 

I now return you to your regularily scheduled banter.

 

- Jeff

 

Team GeoPink

That same could be said for caches listed on other sites though, that they meet every guideline for listing on geocaching.com.

 

However, because they aren't listed here I don't get credit here.

Interesting how you've only responded to the portion of my post which suited your prior argument's template. I'm also interested to hear your response to the paragraph prior to the point you began to quote me...

The rest of your post had nothing to do with this site, it's about your local group. Logging these temporary finds on your local group's website would be a better option than logging them here.

 

You can also use Keenpeople.com to keep track of caches you've found on all sites combined. That way you can log temporary caches for events, geocaches, terracaches, navicaches, your own private caches, etc.

 

Stats on this site should only reflect caches found on this site.

The WGA holds no opinion one way or the other and allows each atendee to log their caches how they like. This is the right of the cache owner. I have done multi's where the owner has allowed the finder to log each stage as a find. How is this any different? I have done caches that have included an unlisted Bonus Cache that could be logged as well. How is this any different? Someone mentioned the LOTEC listings... How is this any different?

 

The above paragraph has everything to do with this site, and nothing specific to our area. I can't imagine that these scenarios haven't come up elsewhere in the country. In fact I know the LOTEC issue is one that has shown up elsewhere.

 

Again I ask, How is this any different?

Are you not reading what I wrote? One find allowed per cache, and only on caches that are listed on this site should be counted in your stats on this site.

 

Doesn't matter if it's an event, a LOTEC (whatever that is), a bonus cache, or a bumblebee. If it's listed on this site, you can get one find for it by finding it. If it's listed somewhere else or even nowhere, you don't get credit here

Link to comment

I invite any of you here to attend the next WGA event. (Date and place yet to be determined, but traditionally there is a picnic every August.) I went to the WGA picnic last August, and I walked over 20 miles that day. (As did my 7 yr old son. Now he won't cache with me much anymore. ;) ) If you come, you will see that the caches placed at a WGA event are of exceptional quality and would meet any cache placement guidelines for gc.com, including being far enough apart from each other, and including a logbook. The quality of these caches is astounding - usually cleverly hidden and disguised micros. MUCH better than any magnetic key holder on the back of a road sign along a road.

 

Usually, the only reason they end up being temporary instead of permanent is at the request of the land owners who would prefer that the WGA doesn't leave that many items in the park when the event is done. Being that the WGA works very hard with landowners to make geocaching accepted in our state, it is sometimes the only way they will let us play our game in their park. And the WGA respects that wish. (It's all about building bridges with land managers!)

 

Within the WGA, this topic has been discussed (quite heatedly) many times, and TPTB have been spoken to for guidance and advice. It was decided, after much discussion and deliberation, that cachers can do what they want in regards to logging temporary caches at an event, as long as the event host doesn't specifically say you can't. Some cachers choose to log each cache that was found, and feel perfectly fine doing it as the caches meet every guideline as I mentioned before. Others prefer not to, and don't. It's their preference. And as a whole, the members of the WGA have decided that it's the cacher's decision.

 

~Mama Fishcacher

Link to comment
your group might ask jeremy about getting your own cache type icon

so others that are not aware of what you are doing in you events can join in.

and your events might get bigger if that happens and there will be a new cache type toget!!!

 

edit: darn keyboard

Please don't bother advocating for a "temporary event cache" cache type. One of the reasons that temporary caches are prohibited under the site's listing guidelines is the undue burden that falls upon the volunteer reviewers. It is a lot of work to review 25 temporary caches and get them listed in time for the event, only to see them archived shortly afterwards. Temporary caches won't get their own cache pages. If a group wants to hide them though, have at it and have fun.

Link to comment
your group might ask jeremy about getting your own cache type icon

so others that are not aware of what you are doing in you events can join in.

and your events might get bigger if that happens and there will be a new cache type toget!!!

 

edit: darn keyboard

Please don't bother advocating for a "temporary event cache" cache type. One of the reasons that temporary caches are prohibited under the site's listing guidelines is the undue burden that falls upon the volunteer reviewers. It is a lot of work to review 25 temporary caches and get them listed in time for the event, only to see them archived shortly afterwards. Temporary caches won't get their own cache pages. If a group wants to hide them though, have at it and have fun.

well for more as a mark that they found it for there area

so can we put a 1 listing for a temp cache and put in the reviewer box that this is a temp event cache that gos on every year?? will it work then??

or if they had a cache placed just to get logs and is up all the time???

Link to comment

The big difference I see in this situation:

 

If someone sees my find count and wants to know about the caches I've found, for example to "judge" my experience as a cacher, they need only look at my stat page. All my found caches are listed there. They were all legitimately hidden caches approved by this website. They were all around for a while, that many poeople had the opportunity to find.

Each cache's name, location, coordinates, difficulty, etc - all that info can be seen there by any member who views my page. You can see that I had to hike 18 miles to get a cache, or I grabbed a micro from the window of my car.

 

These temp caches multi logs dont' allow that as far as I can tell. Some keep mentioning that the temp caches were just as hard and even harder than regular caches. But in a sense that is unverifiable since they never had a listing on this website, but are still being given credit for.

 

For what it is worth.....

Link to comment
It's interesting how many other geocachers want to invent their own rules for the game.  The fact is, there are almost no rules...  Don't trespass, don't bury your cache, etc.  This is one of the greatest assets of the sport- we have the option to do what we want to!

 

This is not a case of a geocacher who is cheating.  This event was held by the Wisconsin Geocaching Association.  This is an association of over 700 members who have done great things with the state DNR and other land managers to make Wisconsin the most geocaching friendly state in the Midwest.

 

Since the first WGA sponsored event in 2001, attendees have been given the option to log the finding of temporary caches on the event's cache page.  This practice has been debated by WGA members several times, with the final decision being that everyone can make their own decision as to how they choose to log. 

 

These are logs for caches- real caches that are just as or more challenging than those posted with their own cache page.  Each of this caches are worthy of their own cache page, but because they are not "permanent" caches, posting them is against Groundspeak's guidelines for posting a cache. 

 

There is a reason this seems odd to many of you-  that reason is because you are not here, doing things the way they have always been done.  If you look at the cache page for ANY event cache that has been held in Wisconsin, you will see that it is indeed, completely normal here.

 

I have nothing against them counting their finds from the event. The issue here is should they count them on geocaching.com?

 

You don't count your navicaches here

<snip>

 

Why should any cache that is not listed on this site be included with your stats on this site?

 

 

We use the geocaching.com website because it works for us. A geocache is a geocache, regardless of how it is announced. If I choose to never log any of my finds, that's my option. If the event organizers give me the option of logging all my temporary cache finds on the event page, it's my option.

 

Jeremy gave us the choice to log our finds how we choose to. In the future, there might be a new log type for event temporary caches. Until then, I think our members will be left to make their own choices.

 

Meanwhile.. rather than wasting my morning on these forums, i'm going caching.

Link to comment
...If you come, you will see that the caches placed at a WGA event are of exceptional quality and would meet any cache placement guidelines for gc.com including being far enough apart from each other, and including a logbook. The quality of these caches is astounding - usually cleverly hidden and disguised micros. MUCH better than any magnetic key holder on the back of a road sign along a road...

 

it may follow the guidelines but the temp caches are not listed on GC.com. In fact, GC.com frowns on temp caches.

 

Why not just enter all the non-gc caches you find in one "attended" log? I don't know if any of you guys scrolled through the event but it looks like a mess.

 

Dave

Link to comment

As far as I know, there is no prohibition from logging a find on your OWN cache. That doesn't make it kosher

 

Technically I could log a find on my own cache each time I hike out to it on a maintenance check and "find" that it is still there. After all, sometimes you have to do a little searching on your own hides due to growth and such.

 

I dare say most people would say I was a doufus, including me ;)

Link to comment

I can see both sides of this issue, but in my opinion, a cache is a cache, whether it is a micro at Walmart, or an event cache.

 

True, the caches are not listed individually on the website, but that is for a couple of reasons.

 

First, the State Park that we had the Campout in would not allow permanent caches. We had to remove the caches on the last day.

 

Second, it would have created one heck of a burden for the local approvers to have to approve each one of the over 70 caches that were placed for the event.

 

It just makes more sense to put them all under the event page, and log the caches there.

 

Another point is that the event caches do not show up on our stats as "Caches Found" they show as Event caches, which is exactly what they are. If you are that terribly concerned with policing my stats, my stats page pretty clearly shows what I have done, and when I did it.

 

My suggestion to clear up the controversy would be to add a new log category for events called "temp finds" or something similar. We could log the Attended, and then log "temp Finds" for the caches at the event.

 

There could be a Temp cache icon in our stats.

 

Then our stats page would show things more accurately. Traditionals would show as traditionals, Events attanded would be the number of events we attended, and temp caches would show how many caches we found at the events.

 

That way, the event organizers would only have to make 1 page for the event, the approvers wouldn't have to be deluged with requests for temp cache approvals, the naysayers would have nothing to gripe about since the temps would be logged properly, and the people that worked their butts off to find the temp caches would get their deserved credit for them.

Link to comment

This topic seems to be causing much angst, and so I've tried to stay out of it, but I feel it necessary to make one point that I don't think anyone else has made.

 

When you go to an event page, and you press the "Log Your Visit" button you are presented with several different options for your log type. Write Note. Atended. Needs Archived. Will Attend.

 

Only one of those has any weight towards your find count and that is the "Attended" log.

 

I understand that having fifty temporary caches at an event is perfectly within the rules. I also understand that there is no rule against allowing people to log the event for the number of caches they found.

 

But realize that when you're logging 50+ finds on an event, you're not really saying "I Found It" you're saying "I was in attendance"

 

You're logging 50 "Attended" logs to get your find count "accurate" but did you really attend the event 50 times?

 

Anyway, I mean I guess that's taking everything to the very literal sense of the wording on the site, but it makes sense. Then and again, it may just be a moot point.

 

Play the game how you want, and if that means getting a smiley for every single logbook you signed, then do it..

Link to comment
I invite any of you here to attend the next WGA event. (Date and place yet to be determined, but traditionally there is a picnic every August.) I went to the WGA picnic last August, and I walked over 20 miles that day. (As did my 7 yr old son. Now he won't cache with me much anymore. ;) ) If you come, you will see that the caches placed at a WGA event are of exceptional quality and would meet any cache placement guidelines for gc.com, including being far enough apart from each other, and including a logbook. The quality of these caches is astounding - usually cleverly hidden and disguised micros. MUCH better than any magnetic key holder on the back of a road sign along a road.

It has nothing to do with how good the caches were. They could be the best caches in the world, but if they aren't listed here they don't count as a find here. Keep track of them somewhere else.

 

If I submit a cache and it isn't approved, can I still let someone log a find here? No! Well, I could let them log another of my caches twice, but that's pretty lame. Temporary caches are the same way. They aren't listed, so they shouldn't inflate your stats on this site.

Link to comment

Do multiple finds on one cache page add up?

Yes, they add up. However, it's a little goofy.

 

If you attend 10 event caches and log each one 5 times, on your profile page stats section you will see a total of 50 event caches.

 

However, if you click on "Event Caches" to see what ones you've logged you'll only see 10 listed.

 

However, when you click on any of those 10, you'll see each of your 5 logs.

 

I think I explained it right.

 

I like the way someone else put it once. If someone asks me "How many events have you attended?" I ought to be able to tell them. If I log all the temporary caches as events then I've screwed up my stats.

 

Personally, I don't wanna do that.

 

Bret

Link to comment

As best I can determine:

  • There are no rules requiring that you log any find online.
  • There are no rules limiting how many times you may log a find. Of course, everyone has an opinion on the etiquette involved here.
  • The owner of the cache/event sets the rules and enforces them. If the owner says it's OK to multi-log an event, then so be it.
  • There are no rules requiring that you log a DNF.
  • This site does not support any fashion of leader board, so it is assumed that competition is not encouraged. There are no statistics to tarnish.
  • Therefore, no one is cheating, and even if they were, please tell me who they are cheating and why you care.

Lighten up people. :o;)

Edited by sept1c_tank
Link to comment
In the interest of accuracy... (refer back to entire post)

 

...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.

 

Nice to read a more in-depth description about this cache-mania event. Thank you for that. Sounds like it was a lot of fun.

 

I haven't decided yet how I feel about this practice and I don't think I would like that many "event" cache finds on my profile page.

 

Logging these finds with multiple Attended entries is a creative way to make a computer program record data. To stand on strictly literal interpretations such as "They aren't listed, so they shouldn't inflate your stats on this site" is missing the point. These are not caches from outside gc.com. They were placed for a gc.com event to be found by gc.com participants. I doubt that people at this event were encouraged to post these finds on one or more of the other caching sites.

 

And how is this different from passing travelbugs or geocoins around at an event? That practice has become the norm even though many do not agree with it.

 

While the "temporary" nature of these caches raises a philosophical question these cache finds are definitely NOT, in my opinion, cheating or used to "inflate" stats. More effort was apparently required to find these than needed for many urban micros. Trying to make people feel guilty for logging these finds seems like an overreaction to me.

 

Logging the caches was discussed amongst the membership, and it was decided that it was appropriate to log each cache.

 

Agreement within a regional geocaching association counts for something. Even from far away California I recognize one of the cacher names involved with this event as a well respected team dating back to the early years of geocaching.

 

Maybe this practice will eventually be dropped from events but for this community (WGA area) at this event they had local agreement and they recognize each others posted finds as legitimate.

Link to comment

Logging these finds with multiple Attended entries is a creative way to make a computer program record data. To stand on strictly literal interpretations such as "They aren't listed, so they shouldn't inflate your stats on this site" is missing the point. These are not caches from outside gc.com. They were placed for a gc.com event to be found by gc.com participants. I doubt that people at this event were encouraged to post these finds on one or more of the other caching sites.

The caches are outside of geocaching.com, they are only listed at the event.

Link to comment
The caches are outside of geocaching.com, they are only listed at the event.

One person's outside is another person's inside. I find that the strictly literal interpretations often restrict the fun of geocaching. Black and white interpretations don't cover all situations.

 

Cachers can be very creative. We might want to focus on the issue of intent before we pass two more pages of judgment.

 

These people discussed this ahead of time and there must have been some local dissent to temper their decision. Were they looking for a "cheap" way to "inflate" their stats? Would an association as large as WGA intentionally look for underhanded ways to increase their members' stats to the disadvantage of cachers outside their area? I don't think so. I believe they spent a weekend having fun and found caches in the normal way. They were positively engaged in the sport and they believe their caches qualified for finds.

Link to comment

This was brought up in another, now locked, thread. I've scanned back a few posts and I havn't seen it asked here, yet. But I might have missed it too. Anyhoo, here goes.

 

Is there anything in the works to help cache owners manage their cache pages better.

 

I spend a lot of time looking through some of the cahces that I own to try to prevent someone from logging the cache more than once. Is there a tool in the works where a cache owner can set their cache page to allow their cache to be logged only once per cacher?

 

I also occasionally scan my archived caches and find that people have logged finds for long gone caches. Is there anything in the works to allow cache owners to block new or even old finds on caches that they have been archived for a while.

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