Lonely Cache Game – Cycle 2

[Team Deejay]

Hi guys,

I started getting the caches together for the March/April cycle (it takes 4 days to get all the PQs), and was a little surprised with what I found. It turns out that not nearly as many people were geocaching in the months of October through February (go figure), which means there are a lot more “lonely caches” based on our past definition. Before we commit to this, I’d like some feedback.

If we commit to the 4 months unfound guideline (last found 10/31/07 or older), like we used for January/February, we will have 1645 caches on the list. This means we would need 4 bookmark lists, which would be difficult to manage for me and difficult for people to understand. If we go out to 5 months (last found 9/30/07), we end up with 757, which would still require 2 bookmark lists. If we go 6 months back (the same date we used for Jan/Feb), the number is 345. We could also choose to pick an arbitrary date to make the number as close to 500 caches without going over (that date is going to be around 9/15/07). I think the best choice is probably the last one, but I’m interested in what the players think.

Additionally, I received a suggestion that we add a rule stating that you can only get credit for visiting a cache once during a given month. This person pointed out that some people posted a DNF, then later replaced the cache and posted a find, then went back a week later and confirmed that it was still there. The person suggested that a person should get credit for whatever maintenance they do and other bonuses, but should only get credit for one visit. I’m persuaded that this is a good rule to add, but I’d again like some feedback.

Team Deejay

[seldom|seen]

This next period will no doubt be heavy with lonelies, however, this is only going to happen for the winter months and when you compile the list again in May and go back 4 months, you’d hope that a lot of people have gotten outdoors in March and April to get some caching in.

I agree with the singular visit rule and understand that this make for a great deal of work on your end. I have posted a couple DNFs and hope to get back to post finds. I would not go back to a find and claim a re-visit however, as I do think is it padding. You either DNF it or find it. Perhaps you strip out the points for DNF altogether and allow only one find report per cache per geocacher per period, unless that cacher does maintenance, adopts or performs some other action to better the cache, in which case they get a couple extra points, but not the terrain rating again. That is the point of the game after all (or one of the most important ones anyway).

I myself am surprised to see a contender log a single cache on 3 occasions for Jan and Feb and get major points for each visit, a find and 2 revisits. This is not the point of the game IMHO.

[labrat_wr]

I would like the list to be managable so the 500 sounds good to me. With the dates the same as round 1, that only leaves those caches that have not been found/confirmed right? If you take it to the 500 level, that adds 155 new lonelies to the list. I think we can live with that.

As far as multi logging a lonely, I would hope fair play would rule.

Disclaimer : Always answering to a higher power.

[sandlanders]

We like going for the lonely caches just to see if we can find them. It helps us to know that someone who had previously found this cache went back to see if it was still there, especially with the tough conditions this winter and our list of DNFs growing.

Posting a recent find of a lonely cache also helps us, but posting a revisit so soon after a find does not add anything to our knowledge unless there has been a major event in the meantime (tornado, flood, construction, space junk landing at GZ, etc.). We like the revisit posts from people who found the caches before they (caches, not cachers) became lonely.

However, some cachers may feel that, while not owning a cache or adopting a cache, they are “surrogate parents” to that cache and therefore visit it more frequently. As for points…

[Mister Greenthumb]

In Southeastern WI, especially Waukesha County where I live I was expecting the number to grow as there is a heavy concentration of caches and a small amount of us regular winter cachers. If the number soared I was actually thinking of changing my name to “Sagasu Seen”. The point of the game is not to win, it is to improve and verify the condition of existing caches. The competition just adds to the fun. After a few months of playing I’m wondering if Sagasu will realize that he might be better off going out and buying his own prizes and start looking for only new caches – LOL. The game is a great addition to improving Wisconsin geocaching and what will work best to keep it going should be the formula. I’ll play no matter what the rules, win or lose, it’s just a lot of fun.

[Trekkin and Birdin]

I think whatever makes it easiest for Dave to manage should be the way to go. I cannot imagine what a big task it must be to set this all up and then try to monitor it, and as a Wisconsin cacher, appreciate him doing so.
I have not been playing this month, but had a lot of fun finding the ones I found last month and will probably play again. It’s a great way to help check on caches and see some more remote areas (which tend to be my favorite caches, anyway). Also, it’s getting folks to log those DNFs, LOL (my personal pet peeve).

As for Sagasu….well, doncha think he’s going to run out of caches to check up that way? Then he can come to other parts of the state and do cache maintenance for the rest of us. Yeah, that works! 😉

[-cheeto-]

After a few months of playing I’m wondering if Sagasu will realize that he might be better off going out and buying his own prizes and start looking for only new caches – LOL

You don’t know Sagasu (ahem FTF dave) very well do you? He finds all the new one’s around these parts too. He’s an animal.

And it’s certainly not about the prizes for him… He just wants something to chase and get his “blood going”. And he loves doing cache maintenance (have you seen any of his???) so we all get the benefits of his maintenance skills. There are some that are offended when he offers to replace their cache exactly as it was. I on the other hand would not be.

Now what was the topic again? Oh yeah, lonelies… I think you should make the list however you want. Perhaps some day you could throw together a list for a month that is not in fact lonely but fits some other characteristic but still have “the game” applied to it… like for instance, make a list of all puzzle caches with a difficulty rating greater than 3. Yeah that would be fun… (nevermind, please disregard that)

[Team Deejay]

@-cheeto- wrote:

Perhaps some day you could throw together a list for a month that is not in fact lonely but fits some other characteristic but still have “the game” applied to it… like for instance, make a list of all puzzle caches with a difficulty rating greater than 3.

While tar and feathers are somewhat hard to come by these days, I suspect that many of your fellow cachers would go out of their way to obtain some if I implemented your suggestion, cheeto.

[elfdoctors]

@Team Deejay wrote:

While tar and feathers are somewhat hard to come by these days, I suspect that many of your fellow cachers would go out of their way to obtain some if I implemented your suggestion, cheeto.

😀 I’d be willing to donate an old feather pillow! 😉

[seldom|seen]

Yes, it is all in good fun. If Dave and I had not started the game and played hard off of each other the first month, perhaps there would have been even more contenders in the upper ranks. We fully expect that to change when the weather turns. For those of us who have been out hard core, hip-deep in snow, braving sub-zero temp and heinous wind chills to dig out lonely’s, the reward is in the find and in the hunt that few others would venture to join in.

I was out in the worst winter storm of the year driving on impossible roads – that’s when caution is thrown to the wind and the “rush” of making a find in the worst possible circumstances pays off. That is when a few of us really get a kick out of the game.

But, now that we are “into” it, we do look for opportunities to score more points, like replacing missing containers or adding baggies and pencils. I have a few DNF’s to log still, but only if I don’t think I’m going to get back to them before the month is out. I don’t intend to go back and revisit and finds that I have made since the game began to score extra points.

The whole point of the game, I agree, it to improve what is out there by doing maintenance for those who can’t or outright adopting “good” caches that need help. No matter how that happens. So if someone logs a cache, and realizes later that it needed a ziplock or some TB’s moved, that fine by me.

Can’t wait for March. now only if I could find 10 more before Feb. is done…

[Mister Greenthumb]

When I saw early that I’ll probably never finish first in any month I got a little discouraged. But I decided that I’m in the game for the long haul. I set a goal for myself back in January to finish in the top ten for the year and I’m hanging in there. We travel around a little and I’m sure I’ll run across LC’s throughout the year. I have one on the list that hasn’t been found since July (Give Me Liberty or Give Me Cache) and it is there. If someone doesn’t find it soon I’m going to go hang it on a string on a tree in plain sight. Besides the maintenance on the caches the posts have been great entertainment this winter.

[marc_54140]

The fewer caches the better. That way particular cacher – named….. – well, he will have to travel further to rack up the numbers.

Baring that, what about a provision that if you wind one month, you are out for the next….two?

[Team Hemisphere Dancer]

I don’t care what the time period is. I just want Sagasu to do my maintenance for me.

[marc_54140]

@Team Hemisphere Dancer wrote:

I don’t care what the time period is. I just want Sagasu to do my maintenance for me.

Oh, yah, I forgot about that. Never my what I said previously!

[Jeremy]

Dave, if it is not a problem for you to deal with the numbers (do the bookmark lists max out at 500?), then I would be in favor of sticking with the usual 4 month period. I think it would be good to get folks to check on all of these caches that have been sitting buried under mounds of snow for four months. No doubt many have had water seep in and so forth and will be in need of maintenance.

@Team Deejay wrote:

Additionally, I received a suggestion that we add a rule stating that you can only get credit for visiting a cache once during a given month. This person pointed out that some people posted a DNF, then later replaced the cache and posted a find, then went back a week later and confirmed that it was still there. The person suggested that a person should get credit for whatever maintenance they do and other bonuses, but should only get credit for one visit. I’m persuaded that this is a good rule to add, but I’d again like some feedback.

I just assumed you could only log a cache once per time it was lonely. (Now if you DNF it and then go back on a separate visit and replace the container, then I’d allow the DNF visit to be deleted and replaced with the higher point value maintenance visit.) I think the rules should be changed to close this loophole and prevent people from padding their stats with spurious visits.

[Author]

Posts