Jump to content

Advanced geocaching?


candlestick

Recommended Posts

Lately, I've been seeing so many new cachers and "arm chair loggers" that are so pushy about not following rules,(not signing the log, saying they found it when they didn't, taking pictures of the final hide) that it makes the game not as fun and takes the fun of friendly competition out,(spoilers everywhere!). I recently had a newer cacher get mad at me when I asked them to sign the logbook and they argued that all geocaches should be kid friendly and easy to sign. While I do support some caches being easy and available for kids I almost wish there was a "Geocaching Advanced " game for people who know and practice rules and want to do more challenging geocaches. I don't know how this would work but I thought it was an interesting idea. What do you think?

Link to comment

There pretty much already is.... in that our D:T ratings stratify caches into kid friendly and advanced, with a grey area in between.

I always cache with my young son (or sons), the youngest being 4 years old. I know there are a bunch of caches we can't get to, so we leave those (for a few years anyway).

Link to comment

Lately, I've been seeing so many new cachers and "arm chair loggers" that are so pushy about not following rules,(not signing the log, saying they found it when they didn't, taking pictures of the final hide) that it makes the game not as fun and takes the fun of friendly competition out,(spoilers everywhere!). I recently had a newer cacher get mad at me when I asked them to sign the logbook and they argued that all geocaches should be kid friendly and easy to sign. While I do support some caches being easy and available for kids I almost wish there was a "Geocaching Advanced " game for people who know and practice rules and want to do more challenging geocaches. I don't know how this would work but I thought it was an interesting idea. What do you think?

I suspect the armchair loggers would do the same thing on the "advanced" geocaching site that they currently are doing on the existing geocaching site.

Edited by CanadianRockies
Link to comment

Here, our "Geocaching advanced" often entails higher D/T, and even then some long-time premium members attempt to bilk the system. :)

 

This comes up no matter what the hobby, when anyone can play...

We just consider it an unfortunate extension of this growing culture of impatience, ego, and entitlement.

- Where selfies outnumber the views experienced, and everything must be adjusted and allowed for them.

You can't say they're ever wrong, or you'll hurt their wittle feelings.

 

Everyone gets a trophy! :laughing:

Link to comment
[...] I almost wish there was a "Geocaching Advanced " game for people who know and practice rules and want to do more challenging geocaches[...]

 

There actually is a kind of advanced geocaching:

Place your caches off the road - with a T-rating 2.5 or higher.

 

Hans

Link to comment

Exactly why I make all of my listings PMO. Most PM's know a little bit about geocaching, or they would not have paid to play here. :anibad:

 

In my experience the big majority of cachers who log virtuals and ECs without having been there, who log found its for physical caches if no container is present (some leave a throwdown, some ask for log permission) and who

do not care much whether their logs are spoilers (what they care about is their score) are PMs who often happen to have 1000s of finds. Of course newcomers are likely to make some mistakes, however often they are much more willing to change their behaviour when being told about the mistakes than the experienced cachers who misbehave and know quite well what they are doing.

Link to comment

Lately, I've been seeing so many new cachers and "arm chair loggers" that are so pushy about not following rules,(not signing the log, saying they found it when they didn't, taking pictures of the final hide) that it makes the game not as fun and takes the fun of friendly competition out,(spoilers everywhere!). I recently had a newer cacher get mad at me when I asked them to sign the logbook and they argued that all geocaches should be kid friendly and easy to sign. While I do support some caches being easy and available for kids I almost wish there was a "Geocaching Advanced " game for people who know and practice rules and want to do more challenging geocaches. I don't know how this would work but I thought it was an interesting idea. What do you think?

I suspect the armchair loggers would do the same thing on the "advanced" geocaching site that they currently are doing on the existing geocaching site.

 

What if there was a way to verify a geocacher. So not just any person could just make a new profile but would have to be a member for awhile before joining?

Link to comment

How would this "Geocaching Advanced" game be different from the current high-terrain caches, high-difficulty caches, and Premium Member Only (PMO) caches?

Perhaps that the general public wouldn't be able to view them or be able to log them unless they were part of the advanced group? But then it does seem sort of discriminatory doesn't it. Who would say who could be part of it?

Link to comment

Here, our "Geocaching advanced" often entails higher D/T, and even then some long-time premium members attempt to bilk the system. :)

 

This comes up no matter what the hobby, when anyone can play...

We just consider it an unfortunate extension of this growing culture of impatience, ego, and entitlement.

- Where selfies outnumber the views experienced, and everything must be adjusted and allowed for them.

You can't say they're ever wrong, or you'll hurt their wittle feelings.

 

Everyone gets a trophy! :laughing:

Wow yeah I can totally see that. Good point.

Link to comment

What if there was a way to verify a geocacher. So not just any person could just make a new profile but would have to be a member for awhile before joining?

 

Huh? What's the difference between "being a member" and "joining"?

 

Like you would be a member of geocaching and then "join" an advanced group after awhile. So a new member of the advanced group wouldn't be a new account just a continuation of the same account.

Link to comment

How would this "Geocaching Advanced" game be different from the current high-terrain caches, high-difficulty caches, and Premium Member Only (PMO) caches?

 

+1

 

There is so much room in this game to get creative with tricky puzzles and challenging cache placements. Anyone can easily raise the lowest common denominator for a given cache with just a little effort, and yet they'd rather redesign the entire game to be completely unwelcoming and kind of vindictive.

Link to comment

How would this "Geocaching Advanced" game be different from the current high-terrain caches, high-difficulty caches, and Premium Member Only (PMO) caches?

 

+1

 

There is so much room in this game to get creative with tricky puzzles and challenging cache placements. Anyone can easily raise the lowest common denominator for a given cache with just a little effort, and yet they'd rather redesign the entire game to be completely unwelcoming and kind of vindictive.

I can see what you mean by that. The problem is that new cachers still log finds even on the puzzles and higher terrains without finding. I defintily wouldn't want to push people out of the game but just thinking of what could be done to get people to actually play an have fun experience rather than getting a large number of smilies.it seems the game has already been changed quite a bit since it first came out.

Edited by candlestick
Link to comment

How would this "Geocaching Advanced" game be different from the current high-terrain caches, high-difficulty caches, and Premium Member Only (PMO) caches?

 

+1

 

There is so much room in this game to get creative with tricky puzzles and challenging cache placements. Anyone can easily raise the lowest common denominator for a given cache with just a little effort, and yet they'd rather redesign the entire game to be completely unwelcoming and kind of vindictive.

I can see what you mean by that. The problem is that new cachers still log finds even on the puzzles and higher terrains without finding. I defintily wouldn't want to push people out of the game but just thinking of what could be done to get people to actually play an have fun experience rather than getting a large number of smilies.it seems the game has already been changed quite a bit since it first came out.

 

There are so many positive ways that you can overcome this sort of minor nuisance without trying to make geocaching universally exclusionary. The entire point of publishing a geocache on Geocaching.com is so other people can find it. You do not have to publish your caches there. You can have an exclusive advanced geocaching club by just giving the coordinates to specially selected advanced geocachers. Otherwise, here's how to improve your own experience in a game that attracts a wide variety of people who don't always act exactly the same way all the time:

 

Lead by example.

 

Put out good caches. A good cache is a cache you would like to find.

 

Write detailed and thoughtful logs on the caches you find. Log detailed and thoughtful DNFs when your search isn't a success.

 

Maintain your own caches and enforce high standards by checking your logs and deleting illegitimate finds.

 

Give people the benefit of the doubt sometimes. Most geocachers are good people, and sometimes new geocachers make mistakes.

 

Learn to manage your own reactions to other geocachers. Remember that your idea of fun is yours alone, and others have different tastes and goals.

 

Do not engage in battles with poorly behaved geocachers. If someone logs a false find on your cache, delete the log, and otherwise ignore the person who wrote it. If he/she relogs or harasses you for deleting the log, do not respond. Just report to Groundspeak. If you think someone is being abusive to someone else's cache and the cache owner is absent or not responding, log an NM or an NA and move on. Bad people are rare and the game does not need to be reworked in reaction to them.

 

Don't worry so much about other people's find counts, other people's profiles, other people's souvenirs, and other people's statistics.

Edited by narcissa
Link to comment

How would this "Geocaching Advanced" game be different from the current high-terrain caches, high-difficulty caches, and Premium Member Only (PMO) caches?

 

+1

 

There is so much room in this game to get creative with tricky puzzles and challenging cache placements. Anyone can easily raise the lowest common denominator for a given cache with just a little effort, and yet they'd rather redesign the entire game to be completely unwelcoming and kind of vindictive.

I can see what you mean by that. The problem is that new cachers still log finds even on the puzzles and higher terrains without finding. I defintily wouldn't want to push people out of the game but just thinking of what could be done to get people to actually play an have fun experience rather than getting a large number of smilies.it seems the game has already been changed quite a bit since it first came out.

I don't think newbies are the problem. The two throwdowns I've knowingly discovered have been placed by premium members with 5,000 and 20,000 finds respectively. Fake logs on puzzles and high-terrain caches are easily spotted.

Link to comment

... they argued that all geocaches should be kid friendly and easy to sign.

And you responded that only caches with attribute "Recommended for kids" should be kid friendly, right?

 

We don't need separate game. It's just owners who need to start taking care of their caches, delete spoiler logs and attached images, occasionally check physical logs and demand its signing (and eventually delete fake logs no matter that the guys who wrote them might get mad). Well, actually let's get them mad and disgusted and maybe some of them will find another fake game that will satisfy them.

Link to comment

How would this "Geocaching Advanced" game be different from the current high-terrain caches, high-difficulty caches, and Premium Member Only (PMO) caches?

 

+1

 

There is so much room in this game to get creative with tricky puzzles and challenging cache placements. Anyone can easily raise the lowest common denominator for a given cache with just a little effort, and yet they'd rather redesign the entire game to be completely unwelcoming and kind of vindictive.

I can see what you mean by that. The problem is that new cachers still log finds even on the puzzles and higher terrains without finding. I defintily wouldn't want to push people out of the game but just thinking of what could be done to get people to actually play an have fun experience rather than getting a large number of smilies.it seems the game has already been changed quite a bit since it first came out.

 

There are so many positive ways that you can overcome this sort of minor nuisance without trying to make geocaching universally exclusionary. The entire point of publishing a geocache on Geocaching.com is so other people can find it. You do not have to publish your caches there. You can have an exclusive advanced geocaching club by just giving the coordinates to specially selected advanced geocachers. Otherwise, here's how to improve your own experience in a game that attracts a wide variety of people who don't always act exactly the same way all the time:

 

Lead by example.

 

Put out good caches. A good cache is a cache you would like to find.

 

Write detailed and thoughtful logs on the caches you find. Log detailed and thoughtful DNFs when your search isn't a success.

 

Maintain your own caches and enforce high standards by checking your logs and deleting illegitimate finds.

 

Give people the benefit of the doubt sometimes. Most geocachers are good people, and sometimes new geocachers make mistakes.

 

Learn to manage your own reactions to other geocachers. Remember that your idea of fun is yours alone, and others have different tastes and goals.

 

Do not engage in battles with poorly behaved geocachers. If someone logs a false find on your cache, delete the log, and otherwise ignore the person who wrote it. If he/she relogs or harasses you for deleting the log, do not respond. Just report to Groundspeak. If you think someone is being abusive to someone else's cache and the cache owner is absent or not responding, log an NM or an NA and move on. Bad people are rare and the game does not need to be reworked in reaction to them.

 

Don't worry so much about other people's find counts, other people's profiles, other people's souvenirs, and other people's statistics.

 

This! Very helpful thanks for adding these. I guess it is easy to get lost in focusing on other people and what they're doing or not doing.

Link to comment

I can see what you mean by that. The problem is that new cachers still log finds even on the puzzles and higher terrains without finding. I defintily wouldn't want to push people out of the game but just thinking of what could be done to get people to actually play an have fun experience rather than getting a large number of smilies.it seems the game has already been changed quite a bit since it first came out.

...or they just go caching in groups of people who all want high T or D caches, where 1 person does all the work for them.

And there's nothing anyone can do about that unless the group causes actual problems (law/nature/destruction/etc). Group caching under a name is allowable. So such people typically won't get to 'experience' whatever the CO of such caches had intended for finders to experience (do). But, as an owner you can't "make" anyone do anything for a cache, other than require that a name (group or individual) under which they cache is signed in the logbook.

 

If something like "advanced geocaching" were put into place, it would need to be much stricter while also being verifiable, and I don't see that happening any time soon...

Recommend the tips narcissa posted above.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

I can see what you mean by that. The problem is that new cachers still log finds even on the puzzles and higher terrains without finding. I defintily wouldn't want to push people out of the game but just thinking of what could be done to get people to actually play an have fun experience rather than getting a large number of smilies.it seems the game has already been changed quite a bit since it first came out.

...or they just go caching in groups of people who all want high T or D caches, where 1 person does all the work for them.

And there's nothing anyone can do about that unless the group causes actual problems (law/nature/destruction/etc). Group caching under a name is allowable. So such people typically won't get to 'experience' whatever the CO of such caches had intended for finders to experience (do). But, as an owner you can't "make" anyone do anything for a cache, other than require that a name (group or individual) under which they cache is signed in the logbook.

 

If something like "advanced geocaching" were put into place, it would need to be much stricter while also being verifiable, and I don't see that happening any time soon...

Recommend the tips narcissa posted above.

I have some high-terrain multis intended to showcase some interesting (to my mind) places along the way to GZ. A few people have devised ways of circumventing them: searching online resources for signage, visiting every possible location on the ground or brute-forcing the checker over a period of several weeks. Does it bother me? Not in the least, I actually find it rather amusing to watch their antics and read their logs afterwards, and in one case had a good laugh with the person in question when I saw her afterwards at an event. Everyone has different ways of enjoying the game, so as long as they enjoyed my cache by whatever means, I'm happy.

Link to comment

Yep, I've come that point as well as an owner. Whil I don't like puzzle solutions being handed about willie nillie, I do prefer people at least to make an attempt, or seek some amount of help - but if people go in groups to find a difficult cache, I'm not going to make a fuss about 'legitimacy' or anything like that. COs can't delete finds of people who haven't solved a puzzle or physically climbed a tree or what have you; but if they wish they can highlight and congratulate those who did do things the intended way ;) (though that can also cause some angsty community reaction)

 

I had a friend who built a Wherigo, and knowing that they can easily be hacked, and as a math major and programmer, he coded an encrypted second layer into the cartridge; however, the function to execute LUA code inline isn't available on smartphone apps, so the Wherigo could only work on native devices. Being unable to execute it, I hacked it, discovered the encryption (this was a 5 difficulty BTW), and managed to reverse engineer his binary decryption function to get at the script source, and ultimately locate the final coordinates (and I informed him of my progress as well along the way). Definitely an alternative solution, and I was pretty proud of the accomplishment, which was definitely also worth the 5 difficulty.

 

As a CO I'd be super impressed if someone resorted to something like that - but there's definitely reward as a CO when the intended method of solving a puzzle is discovered and used, especially if the person fully enjoyed it. Ultimately when things go as intended, there's clean joy all around (ideally); but it's not worth being actually upset if someone finds a way around that isn't intended, if they still have fun doing it. And it can be a learning process for everyone involved :)

 

It's just annoying if a puzzle is effectively no longer a puzzle because everyone just gets the coordinates from a past finder. I know a few COs who've archived caches because of that. One can argue "getting coordinates from someone" is a roundabout way to solve a puzzle, but.. really? meh. *shrug* Up to the CO how to handle that.

 

And I think most every community has at a handful of people who can be relied upon to just give out coordinates of caches they've found with no remorse...

Link to comment

It's just annoying if a puzzle is effectively no longer a puzzle because everyone just gets the coordinates from a past finder. I know a few COs who've archived caches because of that.

People that get annoyed and archive their caches see two possibilities: you can solve the puzzle and find the cache or you can cheat and find the cache. When thinking of only those two choices, it's easy to see how people doing the latter can be annoying: half of the value of their cache is wasted (one might even say "destroyed") in the process. Admittedly sad.

 

But I claim that for those people using "creative" ways to get the answer, the two actual possibilities are that they can cheat and find the cache or they can not find the cache at all. In other words, they aren't going to solve the puzzle no matter what. If they cheat and find my cache, at least they enjoy the physical part of finding my cache. They were never going to solve the puzzle, so I can't see any reason for me to consider them not solving the puzzle as some kind of loss.

Edited by dprovan
Link to comment
I claim that for those people using "creative" ways to get the answer, the two actual possibilities are that they can cheat and find the cache or they can not find the cache at all. In other words, they aren't going to solve the puzzle no matter what. If they cheat and find my cache, at least they enjoy the physical part of finding my cache. They were never going to solve the puzzle, so I can't see any reason for me to consider them not solving the puzzle as some kind of loss.

Agreed.

 

In putting out a puzzle that is 5+ difficulty, you kind of have to have already decided how significant the puzzle is to you, in case the coordinates get out and are passed around. Worst case scenario, would you archive your puzzle if the 'finders' who didn't solve it pass a certain threshold? Or would you not care and just be glad people had fun finding the container? I think either response is fine. It's unfortunate if a CO decides to archive the puzzle cache though, as it could take away a great puzzle from people who would like to solve it; but hey it's the CO's listing.

 

Years ago a friend and I solved a puzzle cache in Ohio that was unfound for 2 years. We solved it in a week with an 'aha' moment, and drove down to find it a few days later. The owner was super happy, but told us about other hard puzzles he'd published, and the people in his area were prone to just passing solutions around. He got frustrated because no one really ever attempted any puzzles, but kept finding his, so he archived it. We respected his wishes not to pass the solution around; we were contacted for help, tips, even called liars for finding it claiming the puzzle had no solutions. When others from our area decided to try it and solved it, then found it, we got blamed for passing around answers, which we did not do. The cache was soon archived.

 

Some people just can't let things go (and I'm referring to his community, not the CO who archived the cache, whom I have great sympathy for.

 

It's really can be tough owning a tough cache.

Link to comment
But I claim that for those people using "creative" ways to get the answer, the two actual possibilities are that they can cheat and find the cache or they can not find the cache at all. In other words, they aren't going to solve the puzzle no matter what. If they cheat and find my cache, at least they enjoy the physical part of finding my cache. They were never going to solve the puzzle, so I can't see any reason for me to consider them not solving the puzzle as some kind of loss.
And then there are those who solve the puzzle, but not in a way the CO anticipated.

 

And then there are those who found the cache, but never had the coordinates (whether by solving the puzzle or by obtaining them from someone else).

 

And then there are those who collaborated with others, and contributed only part of the solution, relying on others for the rest.

 

And then there are those...

Link to comment
But I claim that for those people using "creative" ways to get the answer, the two actual possibilities are that they can cheat and find the cache or they can not find the cache at all. In other words, they aren't going to solve the puzzle no matter what. If they cheat and find my cache, at least they enjoy the physical part of finding my cache. They were never going to solve the puzzle, so I can't see any reason for me to consider them not solving the puzzle as some kind of loss.
And then there are those who solve the puzzle, but not in a way the CO anticipated.

 

And then there are those who found the cache, but never had the coordinates (whether by solving the puzzle or by obtaining them from someone else).

 

And then there are those who collaborated with others, and contributed only part of the solution, relying on others for the rest.

 

And then there are those...

 

that had difficulty solving the puzzle so contacted the CO, who provided a hint or two which led to the person being able to solve the puzzle.

 

As I see it, a CO created a puzzle cache because, their intent was to have finders solve a puzzle to obtain the coordinates. Even if solving requires hints from the CO, that still lets the CO decide how many and what kind of hints to give. When someone just gets the coordinates from a friend, they're bypassing the intent of the CO entirely.

 

 

Link to comment

It's just annoying if a puzzle is effectively no longer a puzzle because everyone just gets the coordinates from a past finder. I know a few COs who've archived caches because of that.

People that get annoyed and archive their caches see two possibilities: you can solve the puzzle and find the cache or you can cheat and find the cache. When thinking of only those two choices, it's easy to see how people doing the latter can be annoying: half of the value of their cache is wasted (one might even say "destroyed") in the process. Admittedly sad.

 

But I claim that for those people using "creative" ways to get the answer, the two actual possibilities are that they can cheat and find the cache or they can not find the cache at all. In other words, they aren't going to solve the puzzle no matter what. If they cheat and find my cache, at least they enjoy the physical part of finding my cache. They were never going to solve the puzzle, so I can't see any reason for me to consider them not solving the puzzle as some kind of loss.

 

Your analysis above is simplified as it only refers to caches with a single stage. If people visit the final only they might also skip locations which are central to the cache and this will also have a key effect on the type of logs they write. Often the final is the least important part of such caches and often hidden off from the real locations of interest that are shown by the cache . In such cases it is particularly unfortunate if a high proportion of finders visits only the final.

 

I do understand every cache owner who does not put out caches for the enjoyment of those who only wish to visit a container somewhere and score "+1". If such logs are numerous, it's a loss for the cache owner and all those who appreciate meaningful logs (e.g. to help them select caches that could be suitable for them) and it will also affect aspects like the FP ratio.

 

For my caches I'd say that the value of the final container is 0.5% and 99.5% of the value is in what comes before the container - so your half of the value calculation does not apply to all caches. By visiting only the final, much more than 50% of the planned cache experience and a considerable part of the physical part can be skipped by cheaters.

Link to comment

"cheaters" = "creative and/or thrifty" (cheaters is a loaded term, can we avoid using it in cases where objective rules aren't broken? despite the controversial/taboo methdologies they might use to skip intended experiences)

Otherwise yes ph34r.gif

 

On one hand, bypassing the CO intent may be against the spirit of the game as presented by the CO; on the other hand, COs can be extremely uptight about finders doing things their way which is not fundamentally necessary to the game.

 

It'd be nice if everyone could think of everyone else and proceed conscious of that. Alas, that's an ideal :P

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

"cheaters" = "creative and/or thrifty"

 

I did not mean people who solve a puzzle in an unintended manner by exploiting some weakness or who happen to find a cache by chance.

I meant sharing of final coordinates (not the one that happens if 2 cachers go on a tour and only one has solved the puzzle) and there neither of the two words is correct and I do not know another one that fits - English is not my native language.

Link to comment

Right, and even then, sharing coordinates isn't "cheating", even though it's circumventing the spirit of the puzzle/task. If they find the cache and sign the log, they can log it found, so it's not cheating. It's just... I don't know, cheap? Even that's inflamatory. I wouldn't say creative though. Before I put "thrifty" I had put "lazy", but that's inflamatory too :P

They did what was needed to be done to log the find (for whatever reason - whether inability or love for the +1), but without regards for the intended manner. And any one CO may or may not be frustrated by that 'strategy'.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

Right, and even then, sharing coordinates isn't "cheating", even though it's circumventing the spirit of the puzzle/task. If they find the cache and sign the log, they can log it found, so it's not cheating. It's just... I don't know, cheap? Even that's inflamatory. I wouldn't say creative though. Before I put "thrifty" I had put "lazy", but that's inflamatory too :P

They did what was needed to be done to log the find (for whatever reason - whether inability or love for the +1), but without regards for the intended manner. And any one CO may or may not be frustrated by that 'strategy'.

 

Often it is turned into cheating because they write their logs in a way which does not conform to what they did. For example, if they make everyone (including the hider) believe that they visited all the stages (and thus that everything is ok and findable) and in reality only visited the final, how would you refer to that?

 

Cheating is not an ideal term, but thrifthy and creative are much worse.

 

There is nothing creative in looking up coordinates in a list shared among hundreds of geocachers and I would not call it thrifty either since what I have in mind also concerns visiting the stages of a cache and that's typically not an issue of inability.

Link to comment

Right, and even then, sharing coordinates isn't "cheating", even though it's circumventing the spirit of the puzzle/task. If they find the cache and sign the log, they can log it found, so it's not cheating. It's just... I don't know, cheap? Even that's inflamatory. I wouldn't say creative though. Before I put "thrifty" I had put "lazy", but that's inflamatory too :P

They did what was needed to be done to log the find (for whatever reason - whether inability or love for the +1), but without regards for the intended manner. And any one CO may or may not be frustrated by that 'strategy'.

 

Often it is turned into cheating because they write their logs in a way which does not conform to what they did. For example, if they make everyone (including the hider) believe that they visited all the stages (and thus that everything is ok and findable) and in reality only visited the final, how would you refer to that?

 

Cheating is not an ideal term, but thrifthy and creative are much worse.

 

There is nothing creative in looking up coordinates in a list shared among hundreds of geocachers and I would not call it thrifty either since what I have in mind also concerns visiting the stages of a cache and that's typically not an issue of inability.

 

At a certain point, the cache owner has to take responsibility for his/her reactions to this sort of thing. Geocache placement shouldn't be about controlling others. It's all fine and dandy to place a cache with specific intentions, but there are always going to be people who do it a different way, or people who do it the intended way and don't enjoy it very much, or people who just aren't interested in writing logs.

 

The healthy thing to do is to take pleasure in inventing and placing the cache, and in the good logs you do get.

Link to comment

Right, and even then, sharing coordinates isn't "cheating", even though it's circumventing the spirit of the puzzle/task. If they find the cache and sign the log, they can log it found, so it's not cheating. It's just... I don't know, cheap? Even that's inflamatory. I wouldn't say creative though. Before I put "thrifty" I had put "lazy", but that's inflamatory too :P

They did what was needed to be done to log the find (for whatever reason - whether inability or love for the +1), but without regards for the intended manner. And any one CO may or may not be frustrated by that 'strategy'.

 

Often it is turned into cheating because they write their logs in a way which does not conform to what they did. For example, if they make everyone (including the hider) believe that they visited all the stages (and thus that everything is ok and findable) and in reality only visited the final, how would you refer to that?

 

Cheating is not an ideal term, but thrifthy and creative are much worse.

 

There is nothing creative in looking up coordinates in a list shared among hundreds of geocachers and I would not call it thrifty either since what I have in mind also concerns visiting the stages of a cache and that's typically not an issue of inability.

Yes, if you keep extending and adding to the situation, then terms can change.

If a log is misleading, but they still found the final and signed the cache, then it's not cheating. But then the content is invalid and can cause others difficulties and frustrations. The person may have outright lied about their experience even while the required task was valid and carried out. A complaint may possibly get them a tap on the shoulder to edit their log, but maybe not, who knows. ...But it's not cheating.

 

I can't say thrifty and creative are the best words, but "worse"? No. Unless you're someone who doesn't like what you see. But then it's subjective again. Do you have a better neutral term for someone who isn't cheating but isn't doing things as intended, regardless of whether or not a CO cares?

 

I said (quite explicitly) I would not call getting coordinates from someone "creative". Thrifty would be more accurate, but maybe there's a better term. If extra steps are considered gratuitous work to the minimal requirements for a Find, then doing only what is "necessary" means being thrifty with extra work. Being optimal. Removing the fluff and getting to what's needed to be done.

 

To be clear, I'm not condoning such actions in the slightest; only saying it's not cheating if the requirements (per the rules/guidelines) aren't broken, but it is taboo/controversial to the point that it can cause angst for the CO or the greater community.

 

To the OP, I would think that "Advanced Geocaching" would be much stricter in such areas. But I don't see that happening at all :P not unless someone else starts a new site and is willing to police such rules that will be ridicuous to verify and disputes a pain to moderate laugh.gif. (unless you move into other concepts like M* where digital devices become one manner of verification. But then you have to have higher technical expertise to ensure the technology isn't hacked by (the real) cheaters.

 

If anything like "Advanced Geocaching" comes into existence, the best I see is an honour system game, perhaps with membership managed by community to maintain the higher standard. who knows.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment

At a certain point, the cache owner has to take responsibility for his/her reactions to this sort of thing. Geocache placement shouldn't be about controlling others. It's all fine and dandy to place a cache with specific intentions, but there are always going to be people who do it a different way, or people who do it the intended way and don't enjoy it very much, or people who just aren't interested in writing logs.

 

The healthy thing to do is to take pleasure in inventing and placing the cache, and in the good logs you do get.

 

Yes.

And if a CO creates something where they hope to give others pleasure in doing more than merely finding the container, then they need already to realize that that is an extra experience that can't be forced. A 5/5 could become a 1/1 if a cacher is able to skip the 'extra' and merely get their name in the logbook; and it's not cheating (even if the CO feels the finder is 'cheating themselves' from the extra experience). But the CO does reserve the right, if they want, to archive the cache for whatever reason they decide.

That's the very basics of the pastime.

Link to comment

Yes, if you keep extending and adding to the situation, then terms can change.

 

What I added is common practice around here for more than half of those who rely on shared coordinates.

 

If a log is misleading, but they still found the final and signed the cache, then it's not cheating.

 

The found it log is valid and cannot be deleted but I never even touched that aspect - there are more points of views of what cheating means as whether or not a log is valid according to the guidelines of gc.com. In any case the contents of a log of the described type is a lie and not only misleading.

It's like stating that one solved the puzzle easily when one did not even look at it.

That's not misleading, it's a lie.

 

I do not know which understanding of cheating you use. For me if someone is lying, it can be seen as a way of cheating

in my opinion while it has absolutely nothing to do with being creative or thrifty. The worse I used was meant in that sense.

The worse was not with regard to morality.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

At a certain point, the cache owner has to take responsibility for his/her reactions to this sort of thing. Geocache placement shouldn't be about controlling others. It's all fine and dandy to place a cache with specific intentions, but there are always going to be people who do it a different way, or people who do it the intended way and don't enjoy it very much, or people who just aren't interested in writing logs.

 

The healthy thing to do is to take pleasure in inventing and placing the cache, and in the good logs you do get.

 

Yes.

And if a CO creates something where they hope to give others pleasure in doing more than merely finding the container, then they need already to realize that that is an extra experience that can't be forced. A 5/5 could become a 1/1 if a cacher is able to skip the 'extra' and merely get their name in the logbook; and it's not cheating (even if the CO feels the finder is 'cheating themselves' from the extra experience). But the CO does reserve the right, if they want, to archive the cache for whatever reason they decide.

That's the very basics of the pastime.

 

Yes, exactly. Over the years I've seen a few cases where cache owners archived their caches because they couldn't control the way people were finding them. That's their decision, and in my experience, nobody misses them or their caches. A cool cache design can be replicated without a mean cache owner and the game is better for it.

 

There used to be one cache owner around here who would write to interrogate you if you found one of his caches. It wasn't congratulatory, it was accusatory, and it didn't really matter how much excitement and gratitude you expressed in the log. How did you solve it? Did someone give you help? He would even threaten to delete logs if you didn't mention trading swag. Very bitter and controlling, and really earned a lot of disrespect because of it.

 

I remember hearing a well-known novelist talk about the different ways his work had been interpreted over the years, and he always found it interesting and funny to see what other people saw in his writing because it usually wasn't what he had in mind at all! His philosophy was that once a novel is published and out in the world, it becomes its own thing and other people's interpretations are just as valid as his own intentions. I kind of feel like difficult / clever geocaches are like that too.

Link to comment

This is all I can picture when I see this thread.

 

b8f57107-2b21-4658-a996-4f1236e3d382.jpg?rnd=0.2629583

 

Anyway. Bottom line to the OP's question: no, I don't think we need that. If you don't want to do LPCs or the like, it's pretty easy to filter around them and go for the caches you prefer. And as others have stated, leading by example is a good fix: hiding the caches you like may help encourage others to do the same. (A little engagement at events wouldn't help, either.)

 

As for the rest of the debate, I'm not a dungeon master reviewer. I'll continue to play with integrity and expect those who log my caches to do the same.

Edited by hzoi
Link to comment

His philosophy was that once a novel is published and out in the world, it becomes its own thing and other people's interpretations are just as valid as his own intentions. I kind of feel like difficult / clever geocaches are like that too.

 

I'm not sure whether this is a good comparison. If a cache owner realizes that after a while of existence of a difficult cache it mainly is visited by cachers who lack integrity and for example lie in their logs, it might be a good decision in view of the image of the geocaching community to archive such a cache and reduce the number of logs which are prime examples of lacking personal integrity.

 

The novel will not have such effects and moreover, it cannot be archived anyway.

Link to comment

His philosophy was that once a novel is published and out in the world, it becomes its own thing and other people's interpretations are just as valid as his own intentions. I kind of feel like difficult / clever geocaches are like that too.

 

I'm not sure whether this is a good comparison. If a cache owner realizes that after a while of existence of a difficult cache it mainly is visited by cachers who lack integrity and for example lie in their logs, it might be a good decision in view of the image of the geocaching community to archive such a cache and reduce the number of logs which are prime examples of lacking personal integrity.

 

The novel will not have such effects and moreover, it cannot be archived anyway.

 

Yes, eventually any kind of simile or metaphor runs out of comparability.

 

The point is that this is a matter of the creator's attitude, not other people's actions. A cache owner or a novelist can run around shouting at everyone about the correct interpretation and being in a huff about people doing things wrong, but that's a personal choice and it's not necessary. A cache or a novelist can also choose to take a relaxed attitude about it and realize that it really doesn't affect anybody if someone finds a cache or reads a novel in a different way than intended.

 

The decision to archive a cache is always at the discretion of the cache owner. I would never argue against a cache owner archiving a cache. If a cache owner has a poor attitude toward others, then archiving is certainly the right decision.

Link to comment

A cache owner or a novelist can run around shouting at everyone about the correct interpretation and being in a huff about people doing things wrong, but that's a personal choice and it's not necessary.

 

I never intended to promote this kind of behaviour.

 

A cache or a novelist can also choose to take a relaxed attitude about it and realize that it really doesn't affect anybody if someone finds a cache or reads a novel in a different way than intended.

 

If geocachers end up with the image to be mainly dishonest people that does however affect many of us.

 

If a cache owner has a poor attitude toward others, then archiving is certainly the right decision.

 

Archiving might be the right decision for many other reasons which are not connected at all to having a poor attitude towards others. Expecting a certain degree of honesty is not expecting that much in my opinion.

 

If someone wished to visit only the final and skip the stages and/or puzzle, this can be mentioned in the log instead of making statements which are definitely wrong. Are you really of the opinion that it is the cache owner who has a poor attitude if he/she does not like to be confronted with blatant lies?

Link to comment

A cache owner or a novelist can run around shouting at everyone about the correct interpretation and being in a huff about people doing things wrong, but that's a personal choice and it's not necessary.

 

I never intended to promote this kind of behaviour.

 

A cache or a novelist can also choose to take a relaxed attitude about it and realize that it really doesn't affect anybody if someone finds a cache or reads a novel in a different way than intended.

 

If geocachers end up with the image to be mainly dishonest people that does however affect many of us.

 

If a cache owner has a poor attitude toward others, then archiving is certainly the right decision.

 

Archiving might be the right decision for many other reasons which are not connected at all to having a poor attitude towards others. Expecting a certain degree of honesty is not expecting that much in my opinion.

 

If someone wished to visit only the final and skip the stages and/or puzzle, this can be mentioned in the log instead of making statements which are definitely wrong. Are you really of the opinion that it is the cache owner who has a poor attitude if he/she does not like to be confronted with blatant lies?

 

In my experience, this sort of behaviour usually results from a cache owner with a reputation for being harsh toward others. In a previous comment I mentioned a cache owner who would interrogate people and delete logs if they didn't mention swag trades. People reacted to that by being increasingly vague, and by lying about swag trades. When dealing with difficult cache owners, sometimes it's just easier to lie or be vague, instead of poking the bear.

 

Ongoing cache problems are usually the result of poor design and/or poor attitude by the cache owner. If people are rampantly lying in the logs on a particular cache, it's likely not because everyone is a terribly dishonest person.

 

Archival is the cache owner's decision and is usually for the best.

Link to comment

In my experience, this sort of behaviour usually results from a cache owner with a reputation for being harsh toward others.

 

My experience is different. The cache owners do not play any role.

 

In a previous comment I mentioned a cache owner who would interrogate people and delete logs if they didn't mention swag trades. People reacted to that by being increasingly vague, and by lying about swag trades. When dealing with difficult cache owners, sometimes it's just easier to lie or be vague, instead of poking the bear.

 

If someone lies about swag that might be an issue for a particular cache owner and might be a moral issue, but it's not what I have in mind.

 

Ongoing cache problems are usually the result of poor design and/or poor attitude by the cache owner. If people are rampantly lying in the logs on a particular cache, it's likely not because everyone is a terribly dishonest person.

 

I was not talking about problems with a particular cache or cache owner but rather of the general behaviour of a sufficiently large group of cachers (maybe not in your area). They typically lie because they would not feel comfortable with admitting in the public many of their actions. It's like the situation with many streakers in my area who use all sorts of tricks to keep their streak running but some of them never would admit it in the public.

Link to comment

The owner was super happy, but told us about other hard puzzles he'd published, and the people in his area were prone to just passing solutions around. He got frustrated because no one really ever attempted any puzzles, but kept finding his, so he archived it.

Yeah, I can see that. I only ask that the owner think about whether the non-solvers can be ignored. Archiving a good puzzle cache only hurts the very people that the puzzle cache was put out for, but I accept the CO's decision if watching all the non-solvers is too painful.

 

Your analysis above is simplified as it only refers to caches with a single stage.

I see little logical difference between not being interested in the virtual stage of solving a puzzle at home and not being interested the physical stages in a multicache. A CO with a puzzle dear to his heart feels the same about it being skipped as a multicache owner that planted an interesting trip. In either case, I'd point out that the people that see little value in the effort before the final hide are not the ones that get punished when the cache is archived. And I'd also point out that the surest way to make sure your local culture doesn't have caches that lead the seeker on a good intellectual or physical journey is to archive all the caches that present good journeys.

Link to comment

I think it's one reason why tree and river caches are getting so popular around here. Someone at least with every visit has to do required tasks.

 

Puzzles? Well, there's a semi-regular caching group here that goes out specifically for hard caches so people can be there and log them found without having to solve the puzzles. It's not a small group. Because of that many people don't even give it an effort, they just wait for the next event. unsure.gif

Link to comment

In my experience, this sort of behaviour usually results from a cache owner with a reputation for being harsh toward others.

 

My experience is different. The cache owners do not play any role.

 

In a previous comment I mentioned a cache owner who would interrogate people and delete logs if they didn't mention swag trades. People reacted to that by being increasingly vague, and by lying about swag trades. When dealing with difficult cache owners, sometimes it's just easier to lie or be vague, instead of poking the bear.

 

If someone lies about swag that might be an issue for a particular cache owner and might be a moral issue, but it's not what I have in mind.

 

Ongoing cache problems are usually the result of poor design and/or poor attitude by the cache owner. If people are rampantly lying in the logs on a particular cache, it's likely not because everyone is a terribly dishonest person.

 

I was not talking about problems with a particular cache or cache owner but rather of the general behaviour of a sufficiently large group of cachers (maybe not in your area). They typically lie because they would not feel comfortable with admitting in the public many of their actions. It's like the situation with many streakers in my area who use all sorts of tricks to keep their streak running but some of them never would admit it in the public.

 

I'm not really inclined to believe anyone who thinks that all the other geocachers are bad.

 

If I believed that all the other geocachers are bad, then I probably would just pack up and quit the game.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...