Rediculious Event: Number Game????

June 10, 2005

<snarky>The first group has an idealize view that can never be achieved. By default the second group wins.</snarky>

Er, uh, what? I assume you're joking, but even so, that seems totally illogical...

June 11, 2005

First I will admit... I haven't read all of the previous 6 pages, so if there is some rehashing of what has been hashed out, I apologize. (Wait a second. I can't say "I apologize" in a forum. That's illegal!) My daughter (Agent K) took some heat on this subject in the Florida Geocaching website. She hosted a kids oriented event in March hiding 24 eggs in a park. 12 were relatively easy finds for parents with little kids in strollers or small walkers. The other dozen were scattered across a little over a square mile in the forest. All the cachers were invited to log their egg finds on a new cache that was planted during the event. She was thinking that way it would show how many caches they've found under the traditional symbol. One of the guests logged the eggs as events, which was OK with my daughter, because they stated that was the custom from where they come from. Other people in the state came across the cache page and cried foul (none of which were at the event and all of them saying that the numbers didn't matter....). Since my daughter hasn't been able to fix her password on FGA, she missed out on reading about it, but she did later on get wind of the controversy, and has since started calling herself "The legendary and controversial Agent K". Ah, I wish we could let all of this roll of our backs as easy as 8 y.o.'s do....

2.1k · June 11, 2005

All the cachers were invited to log their egg finds on a new cache that was planted during the event. She was thinking that way it would show how many caches they've found under the traditional symbol. One of the guests logged the eggs as events...

Say what? Logged eggs as cache finds? I'll bet she took heat for it.

(Where's the popcorn icon? This is going to be a lot of fun!)

Now I'm totally with the hardliners. Is this where this temp cache logging might go? Now I'm all for a one find per cache program change. WGA at least had real caches.

Logging eggs, were it not for your daughters delicate age, is definitely an abuse of this website. Where was the parental supervision? Were the ones who logged the finds over 16 years old? Was there even a geocaching event posted in that park on that day? And most importantly, have those who logged eggs as finds seen the error of their ways and deleted those finds? I don't imagine those eggs had logbooks but I could be wrong. (Edit: spelling)

Edited June 11, 2005 by Team Sagefox

June 11, 2005

If we bad mouth the methodology by which we log finds aren't we really condeming the articles of Geocaching in general? If if we are damning the articles of Geocahing in general aren't we really pointing to a breakdown of the democartic process? And further if the democratic process is being abused by Geocaching aren't we in fact simply throwing out the precepts of the US Constitution?

Well I for one will not stand by and watch Geocaching bad month the Unitsed States of America!

Why is this issue taking up so much space?

June 11, 2005

I'm with you Royal Red. This is one of the most moronic things I've ever read on this forum.

A: Geocaching is a hobby. I'd love to see a bunch of model railroaders get together screaming about some guy that painted a Sante Fe caboose bright pink. Folks - let people enjoy this hobby in their own way.

B: If you're that worried about people who inflate their numbers you might have some more serious issues that will require professional help. We're fighting a war in Iraq, the environment is dying, and our schools are underfunded. That's okay though, we have seven pages of internet space dedicated to condeming people who log temporary caches.

C: If this issue is still keeping you up at night...then do something proactive. Contact the local association. It's funny how many of life's problems could be handled with a little direct communication!

Edited June 11, 2005 by Green Bay Paddlers

24.7k · June 11, 2005

I'm with you Royal Red. This is one of the most moronic things I've ever read on this forum.

A: Geocaching is a hobby. I'd love to see a bunch of model railroaders get together screaming about some guy that painted a Sante Fe caboose bright pink. Folks - let people enjoy this hobby in their own way.

B: If you're that worried about people who inflate their numbers you might have some more serious issues that will require professional help. We're fighting a war in Iraq, the environment is dying, and our schools are underfunded. That's okay though, we have seven pages of internet space dedicated to condeming people who log temporary caches.

C: If this issue is still keeping you up at night...then do something proactive. Contact the local association. It's funny how many of life's problems could be handled with a little direct communication!

I liked that movie too.

Can't say much for the rest of your post. Come on. If I was in Iraq other things would occupy my mind. If you think this topic takes up more of my time than any other thing in this forum (like off topic) you are mistaken. Don't confuse an opinion for the sum total of what a life is. If you do people might return the favor when they notice that you too posted in this thread and didn't actually manage to say if you were for or against logging easter eggs as having attended an event 200 times.

As for your model railroaders I wonder what debates rage over what long lost color is historically accurate for things like the Locomotives of defunct rail roads, or the right tone of dirt for Santa Fe which if course is different from Denver...

Edited June 11, 2005 by Renegade Knight

2.1k · June 11, 2005

If you're that worried about people who inflate their numbers you might have some more serious issues that will require professional help. We're fighting a war in Iraq, the environment is dying, and our schools are underfunded.

Well, actually, this forum is dedicated to geocaching.

(edit: remainder of post was off topic)

Edited June 11, 2005 by Team Sagefox

3.3k · June 11, 2005

I'm with you Royal Red. This is one of the most moronic things I've ever read on this forum.

Of course it is moronic to you that "purist cachers" want one find for one approved cache found. Afterall you logged two event caches a combined 30 times.

June 11, 2005

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

If he's just logging it to inflate his stats, that's one thing. I personally don't agree with that.

But if he goes and finds 100 caches at the event, and wants his totals to show that, what's wrong with that. Technically he found that many, and his numbers are showing the true number of caches he truly found. I thought the same thing. If I went to an event and found more then one cache, it would be disappointing to just get one find for all of them.

Don't be so quick to judge; yea, something fishy could be going on, but that person might have a legit reason to do it as well. We don't know for sure.

9.4k · June 11, 2005

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

If he's just logging it to inflate his stats, that's one thing. I personally don't agree with that.

But if he goes and finds 100 caches at the event, and wants his totals to show that, what's wrong with that. Technically he found that many, and his numbers are showing the true number of caches he truly found. I thought the same thing. If I went to an event and found more then one cache, it would be disappointing to just get one find for all of them.

Don't be so quick to judge; yea, something fishy could be going on, but that person might have a legit reason to do it as well. We don't know for sure.

It's the number of generic caches he found, in order for it to be a Geocache it needs to have it's own cache page.

Terracaching.com displays the number of Terracaches I've found

Navicaching.com displays the number of Navicaches I've found

Geocaching.com displays the number of Geocaches I've found

They're all caches, but I log them on the appropriate website. No, there isn't a Tempcaching website, but there is Keenpeople.com. I can keep track of any caches on any site there. If someone wants to see how my stats break down for each site, they can go there too.

June 11, 2005

All I can say is, I went to the event cache page and counted...

61 finds for one event? Seems a little odd...

I guess it's all in how you play the game. I wouldn't do it that way!

5.7k · June 11, 2005

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

If he's just logging it to inflate his stats, that's one thing. I personally don't agree with that.

But if he goes and finds 100 caches at the event, and wants his totals to show that, what's wrong with that. Technically he found that many, and his numbers are showing the true number of caches he truly found. I thought the same thing. If I went to an event and found more then one cache, it would be disappointing to just get one find for all of them.

Don't be so quick to judge; yea, something fishy could be going on, but that person might have a legit reason to do it as well. We don't know for sure.

It's the number of generic caches he found, in order for it to be a Geocache it needs to have it's own cache page.

Terracaching.com displays the number of Terracaches I've found

Navicaching.com displays the number of Navicaches I've found

Geocaching.com displays the number of Geocaches I've found

They're all caches, but I log them on the appropriate website. No, there isn't a Tempcaching website, but there is Keenpeople.com. I can keep track of any caches on any site there. If someone wants to see how my stats break down for each site, they can go there too.

Yeah, I be head'n over there right now.

4.5k · June 11, 2005

"Event cache" is really just Geocaching terminology for "event." An event cache constitutes an event and all that is done at that event.

You hit the nail on the head. "Event caches" are not caches that are hidden at or for an event. A person only attends/finds the event ONE time, therefore it should be logged ONE time!

As it stands now, you can score it however you want. But it doesnt take a genius to see that your stats are going to be off when you log the same event 10 times.

Edited June 11, 2005 by Mudfrog

June 11, 2005

And further if the democratic process is being abused by Geocaching aren't we in fact simply throwing out the precepts of the US Constitution?

Well I for one will not stand by and watch Geocaching bad month the Unitsed States of America!

Geocaching is hardly specific to the US...

B: If you're that worried about people who inflate their numbers you might have some more serious issues that will require professional help. We're fighting a war in Iraq, the environment is dying, and our schools are underfunded. That's okay though, we have seven pages of internet space dedicated to condeming people who log temporary caches.

Does anyone else think that was completely inappropriate? If you think this discussion is stupid, fine, you can say so - but don't bring up your war and your school system problems when they're clearly not at all related to the topic at hand. That's called "trolling."

Edited June 11, 2005 by Tidalflame

June 11, 2005

...This is one of the most moronic things I've ever read on this forum...

You've obviously never visited the off-topic section.

...we have seven pages of internet space dedicated to condeming people who log temporary caches...

I wont even tell you how many pages of internet space are dedicated to posts like "I'm laster than you are."

June 11, 2005

It's the number of generic caches he found, in order for it to be a Geocache it needs to have it's own cache page.

Terracaching.com displays the number of Terracaches I've found

Navicaching.com displays the number of Navicaches I've found

Geocaching.com displays the number of Geocaches I've found

They're all caches, but I log them on the appropriate website. No, there isn't a Tempcaching website, but there is Keenpeople.com. I can keep track of any caches on any site there. If someone wants to see how my stats break down for each site, they can go there too.

Well, again I'll state, we don't know why he did what he did. However, to play devils advocate....

I'm assuming that the event attended was a geocaching.com event, and that at that event he found 100 caches, temporary or not. If so, what's it to us? If he chooses to log that event 100 to show that he did find those caches, what's wrong with that? He wants his stats to show his finds, temporary or not. I see nothing wrong with that. I take pride and joy in all my regular finds, and would hate for them to not be apart of my stats. If he takes the same pride in caches found at an event, what's wrong with that? You play one way, me another, and this guy another. If I enjoy the game, and so does he, we have no problem.

Bottom line, he did what he did. Why, I don't know. And honestly I don't really care too much, my stats remain uneffected, the caches I hunt for are uneffected. Even if he inflated his numbers, it don't hurt me one bit.

9.4k · June 11, 2005

It's the number of generic caches he found, in order for it to be a Geocache it needs to have it's own cache page.

Terracaching.com displays the number of Terracaches I've found

Navicaching.com displays the number of Navicaches I've found

Geocaching.com displays the number of Geocaches I've found

They're all caches, but I log them on the appropriate website. No, there isn't a Tempcaching website, but there is Keenpeople.com. I can keep track of any caches on any site there. If someone wants to see how my stats break down for each site, they can go there too.

Well, again I'll state, we don't know why he did what he did. However, to play devils advocate....

I'm assuming that the event attended was a geocaching.com event, and that at that event he found 100 caches, temporary or not. If so, what's it to us? If he chooses to log that event 100 to show that he did find those caches, what's wrong with that? He wants his stats to show his finds, temporary or not. I see nothing wrong with that. I take pride and joy in all my regular finds, and would hate for them to not be apart of my stats. If he takes the same pride in caches found at an event, what's wrong with that? You play one way, me another, and this guy another. If I enjoy the game, and so does he, we have no problem.

Bottom line, he did what he did. Why, I don't know. And honestly I don't really care too much, my stats remain uneffected, the caches I hunt for are uneffected. Even if he inflated his numbers, it don't hurt me one bit.

You're missing the point that the event was listed on geocaching.com but none of the temporary caches were. Thereforre, geocaching.com stats should display one event find, instead people have 50, 60, or even 100 "finds" for that event. Only one cache on this site was found, the rest should be recorded somewhere else.

2.1k · June 11, 2005

You're missing the point that the event was listed on geocaching.com but none of the temporary caches were. Thereforre, geocaching.com stats should display one event find, instead people have 50, 60, or even 100 "finds" for that event. Only one cache on this site was found, the rest should be recorded somewhere else.

You're missing the point that it doesn't matter.

See how easy that is? I can dismiss you as easily as you dismiss anyone else with a wave of my hand and a few key presses.

If you have the notion to tell the other person that they're missing the point, then more often than not, they've got your point and don't accept it. You know what that leads to? Talking past each other and repetition. You're not the President. Unfortunately, if you repeat your stance over and over again, it's not going to make it any more true for anyone else.

Geocaching.com stats reflect what you and the cache owners where you log want them to reflect. No more, no less. That's the *facts* of this matter as separated from the opinions on what the loggers and the cache owners should do.

Edited June 11, 2005 by ju66l3r

9.4k · June 11, 2005

You're missing the point that the event was listed on geocaching.com but none of the temporary caches were. Thereforre, geocaching.com stats should display one event find, instead people have 50, 60, or even 100 "finds" for that event. Only one cache on this site was found, the rest should be recorded somewhere else.

You're missing the point that it doesn't matter.

See how easy that is? I can dismiss you as easily as you dismiss anyone else with a wave of my hand and a few key presses.

If you have the notion to tell the other person that they're missing the point, then more often than not, they've got your point and don't accept it. You know what that leads to? Talking past each other and repetition. You're not the President. Unfortunately, if you repeat your stance over and over again, it's not going to make it any more true for anyone else.

Geocaching.com stats reflect what you and the cache owners where you log want them to reflect. No more, no less. That's the *facts* of this matter as separated from the opinions on what the loggers and the cache owners should do.

Well geez, then I'd better log some finds for all the easter eggs I've hunted over the years. Obviously they should be recorded on geocaching.com because that's the site you record things you've found. I should probably log finds for finding my car keys too.

Sorry, this site keeps track of your geocaching.com finds, not finds for things that don't fit the guidelines. I don't get a "hide" for an unapproved cache, why should I get a "find" for one?

June 11, 2005

You're missing the point that the event was listed on geocaching.com but none of the temporary caches were. Thereforre, geocaching.com stats should display one event find, instead people have 50, 60, or even 100 "finds" for that event. Only one cache on this site was found, the rest should be recorded somewhere else.

But that's the thing, that is your opinion, that's the way you do things. He did it differant. And while I don't do it that way myself, I can understand why he did it that way (assuming his intentions where good, not padding or something, which I would concede is in bad form). He enjoyed himself, he found them, he wants them as part of is stats. There is nothing wrong with that. So what if they were temporary, it was a geocaching.com event. And even if it was a earthcache, terracache or whatever, if he still wanted to log them, who cares? Truly, if he wanted to log the lint he finds in his belly button, big deal. He's doing what he wants, it doesn't hurt no one, he's not logging things he didn't find. It really and truly doesn't matter. Do you agree, no, but does it hurt anyone? No. Does it ruin your enjoyment of the game? If it does, you're missing the point of the game. It's not what some player you've never met, and likely will never meet (I'm assuming) is doing, it's what you're doing, it's you enjoying the finds you have.

Edited June 11, 2005 by twjolson & Kay

3.5k · June 11, 2005

This thread is still going?

Why not just capitulate and re-name it "Abject Silliness: The Next Generation?"

Bret

June 11, 2005

OK, continuing the abject silliness thread. Just to answer some questions about the event that were asked. The loggers in most cases were over 16, with one being 4. There was an approved event page with statements about the temporary cache runs. Those with older children and those who came without children were urged to do "Agent K's Jungle Dash". On these, most of the eggs would have qualified as caches on the GC website, but she thought it would be inappropriate to make all of them permanant. (See: Whose hiding all these micros in a forest? thread and the "Why are they planting caches so close together in the same park?" thread.) Hey, I thought that was good thinking from a 7 y.o.. Now as to counting all those eggs you found growing up.. how many of those had a GC log in them and would have easily gone in as a 3/3? And if so, had your parents been turned in to DCF for intolerable cruelty? :laughing:

June 11, 2005

You misspelled ridiculious !!!!!!!!!!!! :laughing:

June 11, 2005

You're missing the point that it doesn't matter.

this thread isn't even worth responding to, or worth typing anything in

:laughing:

errrrrrrr (the irony)

How many posts have been made that 'it doesn't matter', or 'why do YOU care?'????

It it didn't matter, or if the poster didn't care about it, then why the hell are they even posting in it?

If YOU don't care, or it doesn't matter to you....then move right along.....no one really cares enough about your NON-caring to need to see you post it.

Let the ones interested in this topic, have the topic, without the self-appointed moderators opining on their disinterest of the thread. There are plenty of other threads to build post counts in.

June 11, 2005

Well geez, then I'd better log some finds for all the easter eggs I've hunted over the years.

Awww, thanks for making me think of my favorite sig line.

RJ

22k · June 11, 2005

oh nevermind

Edited June 11, 2005 by BlueDeuce

2.7k · June 12, 2005

Welcome to Geocaching. Where the points don't matter but we love arguing about them anyways.

We should just stop all this bickering over smiley faces and take up Yoga instead. :lol:

8.9k · December 7, 2007

Here it is....this makes GREAT reading folks!

20.7k · December 7, 2007

Since this thread went off-topic years ago and hasn't come back to the topic, can we lock it down?

9.4k · December 7, 2007

But then people wouldn't be able to increase their post count :rolleyes:

2.2k · December 7, 2007

But then people wouldn't be able to increase their post count

Exactly.

Closing this one down.

Rediculious Event: Number Game????

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment