[waterloo.bob]

I vividly remember my first cache. I wasn't sure if I was supposed to look at the logs before I went searching because it seemed like I was cheating.

While I was out rummaging about for that first cache a very experienced cacher happened to come to the same cache and I asked the question, 'is looking at logs cheating?'.

He said he looked at anything which would help him with the find and I took that as standard operating procedure. From then on I've been doing the same. Well sort of.

Don't get me wrong I see the value in logs. If a cache needs maintenance or there is something amiss with the site what a great way to find out.

But, you know, it's the other stuff, the hints and the like that still don't seem quite kosher. The CO can give a hint should he/she choose. It's the stuff beside 'what a wonderful day for caching I had with my kids and dog' that I know we've all seen.

What brought this to a head for me is a local five star (difficulty) cache that has spawned all kinds of questionable behaviours - again, to my mind at least. You can check it out - GC2BBBQ. I've spent more than a ridiculous amount of time trying to find it to no avail. (And learned a valuable lesson in the process - some caches aren't worth it. Spend the time on enjoyable challenges instead.)

That said some may now think that this is simply sour grapes, so I want to make this point perfectly clear. If you are happy finding a cache by whatever means, then good on you.

I just think that a cache found by yourself without any assistance is somehow worthier of a smiley face than a cache where people have been 'given a hint', or was 'told where it is', and/or 'was told where it is and used a mob to find it', or 'been on a phone while being directed to it' and so on.

So I propose a revision of "Select Type of Log".

"Found it" should have sub-categories depending on the amount of assistance was used for the find.

A graduated declining smiley face seems appropriate.

I've put up a web page so you can see the icons and explanations as I can't seem to upload them here:

http://www.bobnixon....atedsmiley.html

But for text only here it is:

yellow complete smiley face - you've found the cache on your own or with your family

no colour complete smiley face - 'used logs for other than cache status update'

blank smiley face one eye missing - 'you found the cache with a friend'

blank smiley face two eyes missing - 'had a hint'

blank smiley face two eyes and mouth missing - 'found it with a mob'

blank smiley face two eyes and mouth and head missing - 'was told where it was'

an 'X' for 'do not even get to make a log entry' - 'found it while on a cell phone while being directed to where it is'

a representation of something I'll leave to your imagination for someone who posts 'easy find' after being told or being led to where it is - 'banned from logging attempts forever'

Your thoughts as to the ethics of assistance would be most appreciated.

[ipodguy]

So you're suggesting a variety of icons based on how much help the finder had? Something sort of like this then:
- - - - -

Makes me go

[macatac1961]

You're asking for people not to exhibit human nature?

[Pup Patrol]

waterloo.bob, on 10 April 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

What brought this to a head for me is a local five star (difficulty) cache that has spawned all kinds of questionable behaviours - again, to my mind at least. You can check it out - GC2BBBQ.

"Questionable behaviours"????? Such as what exactly?

Quote

I've spent more than a ridiculous amount of time trying to find it to no avail.

Funny, I don't see any "DNF" logs from you.

Quote

"Found it" should have sub-categories depending on the amount of assistance was used for the find.

Based on YOUR opinion of how everyone else should geocache?

No, thank you. I'll cache my way, and if I find the cache and signed the logbook, I'll get my simple smiley, thank you very much.

There's such a thing as taking this hobby way too seriously.





B.

[ohmelli]

MY first instinct here was to laugh my butt off... but then I realize that Waterloo Bob is just trying to make the game work "his way"... as so many others do. Everyone plays the game a bit differently. THAT is the BEAUTY of this game! Some people want ONLY easy 1.5/1.5 caches no smaller than a shoe box. And they can HAVE them! Some people LOVE the challenge of a 5/5 micro/nano custom made and hidden in a dense forest 20 feet up with Vultures protecting it! Some people don't want to walk more than 20 feet from their car. Other people want to hike 5 miles for a cache! THIS is the most USER FRIENDLY game I've ever come in contact with... but some players want EVERYONE to play it THEIR way. By THEIR rules. That is such a pitty. Just play the game the way YOU enjoy the game... and let others do the same!

*jumps down off the soap box*

[Sol seaker]

So I want to know how come a family rates more than a friend.
I don't have an immediate family as many others don't either.
And many people don't have immediate family that caches.

I have many friends that qualify as family to me.

Then there are good friends, or just friends, and then there are acquaintances, then there are good acquaintances, then there are people I've just met at the cache that happen to be looking at the same time. Then there are cachers I've run into a few times, such as at first to finds, so I kind of know them, so they are more than acquaintances, but less than friends...

I think you're going to need to get some more smilies.

[The_Incredibles_]

Love it.

You forgot to add one for those who didn't solve the puzzle, but did find the cache: the 1/2-smilie:

This post has been edited by The_Incredibles_: 10 April 2012 - 05:29 PM

[cache_test_dummies]

waterloo.bob, on 10 April 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

Graduated Smiley Faces

[wimseyguy]

So in your book there is something wrong with caching with friends?

This post has been edited by wimseyguy: 10 April 2012 - 05:45 PM

[JesandTodd]

The_Incredibles_, on 10 April 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Love it.

You forgot to add one for those who didn't solve the puzzle, but did find the cache: the 1/2-smilie:

Me too. I thought it was hilarious!
(love the 1/2 smiley too...)



ETA: what about graduated DNFs? Such as easy finds, finds where all newbies have found it, FTDNFs....

This post has been edited by JesandTodd: 10 April 2012 - 05:55 PM

[Sol seaker]

The_Incredibles_, on 10 April 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Love it.

You forgot to add one for those who didn't solve the puzzle, but did find the cache: the 1/2-smilie:

OH NO puzzles are a whole other ball of wax all by themselves.

There are those who didn't solve the puzzle but found the cache.
Those that solved the puzzle and found the cache.
Those that solved the puzzle but had help on the cache.
Then there are many combinations of "had help with the puzzle" "had help with finding the cache" then different types of help on each of these. Was it a hint, or did they just get the solution? Or how much of a hint was it? Was it a good hint? Did the hint really help?

I can see this is going to take a while to work it all out.

[Sol seaker]

And then there are the mult's.
I just went to a multi yesterday where a lot of people couldn't find the first stage, but still managed to find the second stage and/ or final.

So we'll need different smilies for one stage out of 3, but then another for 2 stages out of 3, then if there are a different number of stages...

Phew!!!

Maybe we can get Ambient Skater to work on this on a spread sheet. He did such a great job with the forum schedule, this is right up his alley.

[knowschad]

I think your idea has about this much merit:

[AZcachemeister]

Let's not forget the issue of just how these 'graduated' smilies will be distributed/determined.
As a (mostly) honest cacher I might freely admit I used a phone-a-friend at the cache site, or had help with the puzzle.
Would most/many/any others do the same?
Could any finder be trusted to determine the smilieness of their finds?
How could the CO possibly know what level of smilieness to delegate? (if it were their responsibility)
What does 'found it, but forgot my pen' count for?
What does 'found it, but it was too high up the tree' count for?
What does 'found it, but it was frozen in a block of ice' count for?
Would 'couldn't find it but left a throw-down' count for 1/10 of a smilie?

The stats tab is gonna need a complete makeover!

EDITED to remove spurious backslash. \

This post has been edited by AZcachemeister: 10 April 2012 - 06:30 PM

[Clan Riffster]

waterloo.bob, on 10 April 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

Your thoughts as to the ethics of assistance would be most appreciated.

My thoughts? I should warn you, they may seem a bit intemperate...

I think you've found a hobby you really enjoy.

I think that worrying about how others play has caused you to enjoy it less.

The solution seems to present itself.

[zack_black]

ohmelli, on 10 April 2012 - 04:39 PM, said:

MY first instinct here was to laugh my butt off... but then I realize that Waterloo Bob is just trying to make the game work "his way"... as so many others do. Everyone plays the game a bit differently. THAT is the BEAUTY of this game! Some people want ONLY easy 1.5/1.5 caches no smaller than a shoe box. And they can HAVE them! Some people LOVE the challenge of a 5/5 micro/nano custom made and hidden in a dense forest 20 feet up with Vultures protecting it! Some people don't want to walk more than 20 feet from their car. Other people want to hike 5 miles for a cache! THIS is the most USER FRIENDLY game I've ever come in contact with... but some players want EVERYONE to play it THEIR way. By THEIR rules. That is such a pitty. Just play the game the way YOU enjoy the game... and let others do the same!

*jumps down off the soap box*

/\ This

[The A-Team]

Sol seaker, on 10 April 2012 - 05:52 PM, said:

OH NO puzzles are a whole other ball of wax all by themselves.

Sol seaker, on 10 April 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

And then there are the mult's.

Uh oh. Methinks we're gonna need a lot more smileys. Does anyone know where we can get them in bulk for cheap?

[Fianccetto]

Were going to need a whole new range of smileys for the 1.5/1.5 caches with inaccurate cache coordinates, a hint that is a red herring, and then you find it when the CO tells you their hint is a decoy (but no other info) but its out of reach (if you're shorter than 6'), so can't sign the log. Oh no, we have one for that its the blue DNF!

COs all have their own ways of playing the game too. There will never be any consistency in geocache hides and finds. That is part of what makes it fun and Interesting, all kinds of people play, and they take us to all kinds of places.

[littlegemsy]

Seems appropriate.

You forgot a smiley for those with geohounds. Of course graduated as to whether they assisted with finding the cache and how much.

[ChileHead]

People confuse smile count with score.

[The Blorenges]

littlegemsy, on 10 April 2012 - 10:44 PM, said:

Seems appropriate.

You forgot a smiley for those with geohounds. Of course graduated as to whether they assisted with finding the cache and how much.

Found one...



MrsB

[Mr.Yuck]

Bob is getting raked over the coals, and I predict he won't respond again. But I have to be honest Bob, you're killing me here. You really have to forget about what other people are doing.

First of all, as someone mentioned, there are no DNF's from you on this cache page. I hope this doesn't mean you'd be one of those people who come out of the closet on "why don't people log their DNF'S" threads, and say you "didn't look hard enough".

I seriously see nothing out of the ordinary going on there. One guy say's he got a hint from "Ted". Then there's a bunch of people who found in small groups, (such as the well-known to these forums husband and wife team of dfx and t4e) or indeed in larger groups, like a Res2100-led "mob" as you called it. Ironically enough, this isn't my kind of Geocache, and I'm of the opinion anyone can toss a nano in a rockpile and make a 5 star difficulty cache. Why I say Ironic, is the only way I ever would look for this type of cache is in a group. Especially seeing as it appears seekers are in full view of traffic on a busy road.

You just have to let this thing go. Put it on the ignore list.

[power69]

The_Incredibles_, on 10 April 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Love it.

You forgot to add one for those who didn't solve the puzzle, but did find the cache: the 1/2-smilie:

or the quarter smilie for those that didn't solve puzzle and needed to phone a friend network to find it.

[Straight-Cache-Homey]

My girlfriend geocache together almost exclusively. Should I cut my finds in half?

[The Blorenges]

Straight-Cache-Homey, on 11 April 2012 - 04:25 AM, said:

My girlfriend geocache together almost exclusively. Should I cut my finds in half?

Oh no... but if we can get this scheme implemented, you can have this one and she can have .


MrsB

[Wadcutter]

We have cachers who don't log DNFs and cachers who throw down a film can when they can't find the original cache and claim a find. Like anyone thinks a graduated find would work as well?

This post has been edited by Wadcutter: 11 April 2012 - 04:40 AM

[The Blorenges]

Mr.Yuck, on 11 April 2012 - 03:30 AM, said:

Bob is getting raked over the coals, and I predict he won't respond again...

Ohhhhh... I really hope he does because this is one of the most inspiring topics I've seen on the forums for months! We can have so much fun with this...

waterloo.bob, on 10 April 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

... a representation of something I'll leave to your imagination for someone who posts 'easy find' after being told or being led to where it is - 'banned from logging attempts forever'

Your thoughts as to the ethics of assistance would be most appreciated.

I've just had another look at the link to waterloo.bob's smilies in his OP and realised what this refers to...


MrsB

[DanOCan]

waterloo.bob, on 10 April 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

Your thoughts as to the ethics of assistance would be most appreciated.

My "Found It" log is nothing more than a simple statement of fact, not a score. There is no reason to give it a weight. I found it. If I feel the urge to explain in more detail I'll do so in my log.

[fuzziebear3]

Fun topic But it really is all in jest, is it not?

I usually fess up to any assistance I received in my logs. I always feel a bit guilty taking assistance, but occasionally do.

PS, we need an extra special smiley for the FtF -- I think that special signal antenna. Maybe it gets added to the level of help

[fuzziebear3]

Oh and another one for no help, but somehow reprenting the number of DNFs before eventual success.

[waterloo.bob]

First, to the people who recognized this as humour, I'm glad it made you laugh and I too laughed at your contributions. Don't know how I missed the half smiley. The other contributions were similarly inspired. Thanks.

To the others, sigh, where to begin...

It saddens me to think that some people took this seriously enough to suggest that I really thought caching with friends was somehow less an experience than caching with family. I have a friend who is on a train right now from Toronto who I will be caching with tomorrow. Obviously caching with friends just makes the experience all the more enjoyable. The subject was an exploration into the ethics of 'assistance'. Clearly, maybe not to some, if you have someone else helping you you have more 'assistance', hence the reducted smiley face. Now read the next paragraph...

Am I trying to tell you how to cache? Perhaps you didn't read "... so I want to make this point perfectly clear. If you are happy finding a cache by whatever means, then good on you".

I don't care a fig about how you cache or with who and I thought that pretty much said it. Maybe I'm touching nerves here? Seems the people accusing me of taking caching way too seriously might be doing just that themselves.

And so to all I wish you many future smileys, however you get them;-)

This post has been edited by waterloo.bob: 11 April 2012 - 07:31 AM

[thebruce0]

Poor Bob.
I've found that cache. I'd offer assistance, but I doubt I'd be able to find it again. The CO even has difficulty sometimes. Gotta love those ones


To be a bit of a devil's advocate, I think he was intending it to be a personal choice - there's nothing positive or enforceable about 1) geocachers having to choose the proper smiley or 2) the CO ensuring the geocacher used the proper smiley. But perhaps if there were options, the honest geocachers (or, the ones that care more) might use them.

But... why not just say in the log how much help you had? Everyone I know does that.

From the CO end, a way to combat partial completions - Recognize puzzle solvers and/or hardcore terrain conquerors in the cache description, if you care that much.

IMO, leave the smileys to the people who care about their count and appearance in the profile. Please DNF responsibly however as that's helpful to both geocachers and COs. If I put out a high rating cache like a crazy puzzle, I'm well aware of group cachers piling on. Instead of complaining, let them cache how they want. I'll give credit to people who've fully solved the puzzle themselves in the description, if I feel that was the spirit of the cache+puzzle.

There are treeclimbs where the CO tells people they have to climb the tree themselves to get the smiley or their log will be deleted. Sounds like an unenforceable ALR. Rather, find out who made the climb, recognize them in the listing and let people keep their little smileys if their name is in the logbook (the only LR).

Let people play the game how they want. That includes you as the CO who may create high D/T rated caches with the intent that geocachers fulfill the rating in their search - resort to the middle ground. Encourage and promote "legitimate" completions of intended tasks, recognizing that anything other than name-in-logbook is not "legitimately" required for a smiley.


ETA: Simul-posted w/Bob it seems. Now I see Bob's revelation. Yay!

This post has been edited by thebruce0: 11 April 2012 - 07:41 AM

[kunarion]

fuzziebear3, on 11 April 2012 - 05:53 AM, said:

and another one for no help, but somehow reprenting the number of DNFs before eventual success.

What about when I've written, asked, cajoled, and just can't seem to get any help: Frownie levels of DNF frustration. Sometimes I never did find it. There can even be an icon for "I'm pretty sure the container's gone".

This post has been edited by kunarion: 11 April 2012 - 06:18 AM

[ArcherDragoon]

waterloo.bob, on 11 April 2012 - 05:55 AM, said:

.
.
.
Am I trying to tell you how to cache? Perhaps you didn't read "... so I want to make this point perfectly clear. If you are happy finding a cache by whatever means, then good on you".
.
.
.
And so to all I wish you many future smileys, however you get them;-)

Ok...so, you may have intended this thread to be a joke...fine...but those two statements there certainly stand out as something other than a joke...

[kunarion]

The Bob Smilie Chart might be a fun cache page. You could show the icons and define the levels of smilie. I think you'd have to use emoticons until the system becomes standard on the website . Or the logs could say "This is an S1 find" or whatever.

This post has been edited by kunarion: 11 April 2012 - 06:38 AM

[kunarion]

AZcachemeister, on 10 April 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

Could any finder be trusted to determine the smilieness of their finds?

That's no problem, since everyone else's smilieness gets adjusted accordingly, on a sliding scale. But if a rogue smiler just never gets it right, there's a smilie for that, too.

[knowschad]

waterloo.bob, on 11 April 2012 - 05:55 AM, said:

First, to the people who recognized this a humour, I'm glad it made you laugh and I too laughed at your contributions. Don't know how I missed the half smiley. The other contributions were similarly inspired. Thanks.

To the others, sigh, where to begin...
<snip!>

Parody is not easy. Even the best at it sometimes fail.

[waterloo.bob]

Ok...so, you may have intended this thread to be a joke...fine...but those two statements there certainly stand out as something other than a joke...
[/quote]

You did notice the ;-) ? More humour.

[thebruce0]

waterloo.bob, on 11 April 2012 - 07:51 AM, said:

You did notice the ;-) ? More humour.

Don't forget, here humour = angst

[ArcherDragoon]

waterloo.bob, on 11 April 2012 - 07:51 AM, said:

Quote

Ok...so, you may have intended this thread to be a joke...fine...but those two statements there certainly stand out as something other than a joke...

You did notice the ;-) ? More humour.

Emoticons don't always make humor as intended...

Sarcasm is like dynamite...used properly, it is a powerful tool...used improperly, it can blow up in your face...

[Chrysalides]

power69, on 11 April 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

The_Incredibles_, on 10 April 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Love it.

You forgot to add one for those who didn't solve the puzzle, but did find the cache: the 1/2-smilie:

or the quarter smilie for those that didn't solve puzzle and needed to phone a friend network to find it.

What kind of smiley do I get for :

1. Solving the puzzle, but not the way it was intended?

2. Didn't solve the puzzle, but inferred the coordinates from the way the puzzle was presented?

3. Didn't solve the puzzle, but stumbled across the cache by accident?

4. Solved the puzzle by accident from an offhand remark (e.g. "Oh, there was a puzzle that used that technique")

This looks like a highly complicated procedure, so I propose that before we can log a cache online, we need to go through a 5 to 15 minute interview with a reviewer (online, of course) who will ask the pertinent questions and assign you the correct smilie

[Ambrosia]

Chrysalides, on 11 April 2012 - 09:55 AM, said:

power69, on 11 April 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

The_Incredibles_, on 10 April 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Love it.

You forgot to add one for those who didn't solve the puzzle, but did find the cache: the 1/2-smilie:

or the quarter smilie for those that didn't solve puzzle and needed to phone a friend network to find it.

What kind of smiley do I get for :

1. Solving the puzzle, but not the way it was intended?

2. Didn't solve the puzzle, but inferred the coordinates from the way the puzzle was presented?

3. Didn't solve the puzzle, but stumbled across the cache by accident?

4. Solved the puzzle by accident from an offhand remark (e.g. "Oh, there was a puzzle that used that technique")

This looks like a highly complicated procedure, so I propose that before we can log a cache online, we need to go through a 5 to 15 minute interview with a reviewer (online, of course) who will ask the pertinent questions and assign you the correct smilie

Only if they start paying reviewers!

[Chrysalides]

fuzziebear3, on 11 April 2012 - 05:53 AM, said:

Oh and another one for no help, but somehow reprenting the number of DNFs before eventual success.

A smiley with one purple frog medal for every logged DNF.

[Chrysalides]

Ambrosia, on 11 April 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:

Only if they start paying reviewers!

We'll pay them with smilies, of course!

[Ambrosia]

Chrysalides, on 11 April 2012 - 10:09 AM, said:

Ambrosia, on 11 April 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:

Only if they start paying reviewers!

We'll pay them with smilies, of course!

Hmmm....where to start...

I've heard that chocolate is good. That, or milkbones.

[thebruce0]

Chrysalides, on 11 April 2012 - 10:09 AM, said:

Ambrosia, on 11 April 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:

Only if they start paying reviewers!

We'll pay them with smilies, of course!

But which?
We'll need graduated payment smilies to accurately represent what the reviewers are being paid for.

[va griz]

Most of my finds seem to be with the sun in my eyes, getting bit by some bug or another, in the freezing rain, and it's uphill to AND from the cache. I think those conditions should be required for a full smiley. Now that brings up the question, does a half smiley and two quarter smiles count as a complete find?

(All in jest mind you)

[waterloo.bob]

va griz, on 11 April 2012 - 10:30 AM, said:

Most of my finds seem to be with the sun in my eyes, getting bit by some bug or another, in the freezing rain, and it's uphill to AND from the cache. I think those conditions should be required for a full smiley. Now that brings up the question, does a half smiley and two quarter smiles count as a complete find?

(All in jest mind you)

Accumulated Smileys! Now we're talking!

We have a precedent - Hangman.

This post has been edited by waterloo.bob: 11 April 2012 - 11:46 AM

[fuzziebear3]

And dont forget the little badge for injury during this cache.

[Sol seaker]

But you know, I think we've left off the most important part here.

For some caches one smilie is just not enough.

5/5 caches really ought to get two at least, since they are in no way comparable to a LPC.

Caches found with boats or after a great deal of bushwacking should get more too. A good bushwacking cache should at least get a smilie and a half.

Then there's caches found in the rain, or in the snow: an extra half a smilie, and 3/4 respectively.

How about standard caches found by people in wheelchairs?

I think we've only begun to touch upon this subject.