This topic contains 101 replies, has 33 voices, and was last updated by 
cheezehead 15 years, 6 months ago.
-
Posts
-
😆 😆 😆
Oconto...the birthplace of western civilization:)
@seldom|seen wrote:
…yet I think you all posted copy-paste “found it”‘s on that cache after your tour.
I did say “I think”, there were a lot of copy paste logs (with a sprinkle of “caught a cattail in the eye” add-ons) to wade through, but excessively little about the puzzles themselves. When I get a slew of logs that all start the same way and look almost identical, I pretty much hit the delete key unless I see a substantial add-on like yours.
@johnney cache wrote:
…it was somewhere around cache 95 of 100+. I was tired. I guess we had gotten too accustomed to nano hides with poor coordinates in uninspiring places.
Even stop to consider this may be intentional? Most of my puzzle caches are all about the puzzle, not the final. If you short-cut the puzzles all you get out of many of them are uninspiring nanos or keyholders stuck in uninspiring urban places. You know that since you’ve done so many of mine. And thanks for the PSA, which I approve. If you find yourself geocaching in the Appleton area with a large group of friends and 80% of you haven’t solved many of the puzzles the other 20% has, please do yourself a favor and skip them until next time, at least those that belong to S|S. You may cheat yourself of a smiley, but at least you aren’t cheating those who found it legitimately.
Thanks for sharing the personal stories of your friends. They are touching and I harbor no ill will to them personally, how could I since I don’t know most of them from Adem. The only frame of reference I have is how they choose to play the game. I pretty sure I witnessed your group short-cut a whole bunch of puzzles to log numbers.
Uncle_Fun, BQ, LostBoyScout and 3Hawks I want to know that I never made any insinuations or intended any defamation of character beyond spelling out the short-cut method you used to find my puzzle caches. You missed out on some challenging and rewarding puzzles in the Valley (Ask Johnny how much fun he had solving them) for the sake of posting a high day of 100 finds and in the process you made those cachers, who spent in many cases hours solving them, feel cheated. I know, I talk to my caching friends too.
You sound like incredible people and I hate being on this side of an issue with you on the other. But, as you can tell, I feel strongly about puzzle solving or at least participating in solving and will continue to be vocal about it no matter who is on the other side. You choose to play the game a certain way that makes others feel less rewarded in the way they choose to play.
I don’t geocache to socialize, many people do and I am quite sure my myopic view of the sport’s reward is quite different that the majority because of this. So yes, perspective is good. Mine is obviously skewed to one end of the spectrum since I have a active placed to found ratio on puzzles of 159 to 126 (more placed than found) and an overall ratio of 957 to 214 active or about 1 cache placed to 4 cahces found. Obviously, we can’t all play that way, it would be super-saturation, and I understand that I am in the minority. But without some of us prolific hiders you numbers guys wouldn’t have many caches to log in the first place.
Perhaps Johnny, if you and your TC’s had a ratio in little more in favor of placed caches to found caches, you wouldn’t consider short-cutting solves as you would more fully appreciate and value of what goes into crafting unique puzzles. After all with a group placed to found ratio of… well, here are your numbers:
Total combined finds for 3Hawks (4749), Uncle_Fun (6632), Bushwhacking Queen (11371), JC and the CC’s (3962), Lost Boyscout (2957) = 29,671
Total active placed caches by 3Hawks (3), Uncle_Fun (33), Bushwhacking Queen (6), JC and the CC’s (0), Lost Boyscout (3) = 45, and of all those only 1 puzzle cache amongst you.
That’s 45 active caches to 29,671 finds. I’d argue that your collective perspective is a little skewed in the opposite direction. Perhaps if we both tracked a little closer to center I wouldn’t have to get so defensive about copy/paste group logging and tour finders might discover that adding a line like “sorry we didn’t solve this one but we know how it is solved and it’s a neat puzzle” would go a long way in keeping puzzles owners and bone fide finders from feeling slighted.
Now are we done?
Well, I can’t speak for the others who view these forums, but I think it’s about time to take the feud to PM’s cuz you are both starting to sound like jerks. No offense meant to either one of you.
Like I said in a previous post….
I see no reason to censor the debate on this topic even if it is passionate on either side. In the OT thread we have a whole topic with over 1,400 pages of drivel and over 21,000 replies and that horse is still kicking. There’s always the option to stop watching this topic or just stop clicking on the link.
I started this poll because I truly wanted to take a temperature reading of the Wisconsin geo-community. If anyone believes I had some other nefarious purpose I can’t change your mind. The reason I did it as a poll rather than simply a forum posting was that I many people will “comment” by way of a poll response, when they will not comment in a public forum, particularly when the discussion becomes heated.
I’m not sure how representative the voting responses are of the community. It seems like the responses have pretty much stopped or at least slowed to a trickle, and it’s pretty well split–probably weighted more heavily to the “It’s OK” side if you consider that some of the “Other” responses equate to “It’s OK sometimes” according to the reasons stated by some of the “Other” voters.
It does seem like a small sample but I haven’t compared it yet against other polls. Of course, it means nothing in the grand scheme of things because, as has been pointed out, a smilely is a smilely. But I have found, and continue to find, the posted comments useful–even the contentious ones. Overall this thread has confirmed some things I had thought, overturned my thinking on some other issues, and will shape the way I handle our puzzle caches going forward.
On the Left Side of the Road...@seldom|seen wrote:
Perhaps Johnny, if you and your TC’s had a ratio in little more in favor of placed caches to found caches, you wouldn’t consider short-cutting solves as you would more fully appreciate and value of what goes into crafting unique puzzles. After all with a group placed to found ratio of… well, here are your numbers:
Total combined finds for 3Hawks (4749), Uncle_Fun (6632), Bushwhacking Queen (11371), JC and the CC’s (3962), Lost Boyscout (2957) = 29,671
Total active placed caches by 3Hawks (3), Uncle_Fun (33), Bushwhacking Queen (6), JC and the CC’s (0), Lost Boyscout (3) = 45, and of all those only 1 puzzle cache amongst you.
That’s 45 active caches to 29,671 finds. I’d argue that your collective perspective is a little skewed in the opposite direction. Perhaps if we both tracked a little closer to center I wouldn’t have to get so defensive about copy/paste group logging and tour finders might discover that adding a line like “sorry we didn’t solve this one but we know how it is solved and it’s a neat puzzle” would go a long way in keeping puzzles owners and bone fide finders from feeling slighted.
Now are we done?
No, I do not think this will ever be done.
I have 8500 finds, 400 hidden. And I am an associate of Johnny and his TC. I can guess where I fit in.
So, what the point? One that makes sense?
There are a couple of adages that come to mind, and one that concerns a horse. No, not beating the dead horse!
You can lead a horse to water, butt you can not make him drink.
So, you can make your point here, but do not expect anyone to change his or her mind to agree with you.
@marc_54140 wrote:
I have 8500 finds, 400 hidden. And I am an associate of Johnny and his TC. I can guess where I fit in.
That’s why you of all people should know better.
I don’t expect to change the caching habits of long-time game players. I do expect cachers who follow these threads to understand where I am coming from, I don’t expect them all to agree.
If your perception is that I am a horse’s arse for expecting people to make an effort to solve my puzzles before they go a hunting, so be it. If you, on the other hand, tend to agree that an effort should be made and I have a right to defend my views, that’s good to. If all that comes out of this is a fence-sitter or two giving it a second thought the next time they read, ‘2020 Puzzle Bus Tour, climb abord and clear the valley of pesky ?’s’ then I’ve accomplished something.
@marc_54140 wrote:
So, you can make your point here, but do not expect anyone to change his or her mind to agree with you.
I guess what has surprised me the most is not the lack of agreement on the topic (otherwise there wouldn’t be a need to discuss it), but the lack of understanding of an opposing point of view. I do understand the appeal of logging puzzle caches by any means possible; after all, our team keeps track of our numbers too. Stats are part of this game.
On the other hand, there is an incredulity on the other side that this issue would even bother anyone. If we are bothered by it, we are essentially told to quit placing caches.
We (the geocaching community) frown on posting spoilers in logs. In the puzzle forums here, we state “Note that this forum should not be used to post dead giveaways or spoilers for any puzzle cache.” Yet it is OK to hand a bus full of people a spreasheet of puzzle coordinates? Yes, I am making an assumption here, having not gone on a tour, but it is a reasonable assumption based on reading many logs, talking to people, and seeing the posted details for tours. Maybe I am wrong and everyone on that bus will come with some good-faith effort at solving the puzzles.
It’s also somewhat ironic that we (again, the geocaching community) will generally adhere to some wishes of owners, such as abstaining from hunting a tribute cache until the tributee has a shot at the FTF, unless and until the CO says it’s OK. But CO’s wishes on puzzle caches? Not so much I guess.
So, the “horse to water” analogy doesn’t quite work. On the “not OK” side, all we can do is stand at the river bank and plead with the horse to please come over because the water is really nice. On the other side, you can pour water down the horse’s throat, just don’t be baffled by the fact that he doesn’t like it.
On the Left Side of the Road...Can someone explain to me how one person’s experience can have such a profound effect on another’s experience?
From what I’ve always seen and dealt with – no two people will have the same experience even when in engaging in the same activity at the same time. My experiences – good or bad – are unique to me and in no way does someone else’s experience add to or lessen mine.
I just seem to hear this statement as an argument, defense, supportive statement etc quite often in the WGA threads and at least one or twice in thread alone. I would genuinely like to hear people’s explanation to this. I admit, I’m completely baffled by such statements.
Oh – this is Kat responding. Didn’t realize hubby was autologged in as himself and not AstroD.
If I’m running a race and someone pulls a Rosie Ruiz because they wanted to run the race the way they wanted to, it’s going to bug me even though I would have no chance of winning because I’m slow :). So it shouldn’t matter to me, since what they did has no impact on my own performance and experience–but it would.
If I go back to take some college courses–let’s say I’m auditing them so it’s just for my own edification, not a degree–and someone obtains some test answers and uses them because that’s the way they wanted to take the test, it’s going to bug me even though what they did has absolutely no impact on my own test experience.
It’s not a perfect parallel–back to that “rules for logging” issue again–but neither do I think it’s an apples-and-oranges comparision….more like a Gala and Braeburn comparison…
Now, without the online forum that is integral to geocaching, none of this would ever be known to me. I could have a whole greyhound bus full of poeple shortcut one of our letterbox puzzles and no one would be the wiser. But, I do know it with geocaches–also because some people go out of their way to wave it in my face–so, it bugs me. ‘Bout all I can tell you.
On the Left Side of the Road...We avoided puzzle caches like the plague for the first couple of months that we cached. A new cache appeared 4 miles away last summer and we finally logged it Sunday. That cache had us so frustrated that my husband wanted to avoid any and all of them. After we logged our dnf, we e-mailed the CO with a question about solving it. Even after he gave us a hint it took a while to get the first waypoint. Sunday we refused to leave until we had our signature in the logbook! I would have gladly joined a puzzle cache tour if it would’ve helped us figure it out sooner. Isn’t caching about getting outdoors and having fun with friends? Puzzle caches take ‘em or leave ‘em. I feel sorry for the poor horse, he not been beaten enough? 😆
Dawn@gotta run wrote:
because some people go out of their way to wave it in my face
exactly.
@gotta run wrote:
If I’m running a race and someone pulls a Rosie Ruiz because they wanted to run the race the way they wanted to, it’s going to bug me even though I would have no chance of winning because I’m slow :). So it shouldn’t matter to me, since what they did has no impact on my own performance and experience–but it would.
If I go back to take some college courses–let’s say I’m auditing them so it’s just for my own edification, not a degree–and someone obtains some test answers and uses them because that’s the way they wanted to take the test, it’s going to bug me even though what they did has absolutely no impact on my own test experience.
It’s not a perfect parallel–back to that “rules for logging” issue again–but neither do I think it’s an apples-and-oranges comparision….more like a Gala and Braeburn comparison…
Now, without the online forum that is integral to geocaching, none of this would ever be known to me. I could have a whole greyhound bus full of poeple shortcut one of our letterbox puzzles and no one would be the wiser. But, I do know it with geocaches–also because some people go out of their way to wave it in my face–so, it bugs me. ‘Bout all I can tell you.
Thanks for the response. I’ll take a Braeburn over a Gala. 🙂
For me, it seems from your examples it’s more of an emotional response (due to conflicting standards perhaps) based on other’s actions rather than said actions having a true impact/effect on one’s own experience.
I hold out in case others want to chime in.
Thanks for letting me hijack you thread. 😉
@astrod-team wrote:
Thanks for letting me hijack you thread. 😉
It’s your thread too! Everyone’s for that matter.
Well, there are fewer puzzles for everyone to fret over in the Green Bay area now. Did a bunch of archiving today for various reasons. Some puzzles were just ciphers and as such were really only marginally enjoyable, especially with the proliferation of cipher puzzles that happened after we put them out (and still continues today). Others were decent puzzles, but really uninspired finals. Other puzzle ideas had just run their course.
We will be using the comments from this thread to shape our puzzle placements going forward. I think to save us some of that “mental distress,” we’ll focus on combining challenging puzzles with challenging terrain. That serves a number of objectives. First, the bus doesn’t stop at high terrain puzzles as a rule. Second, that means we won’t be cluttering up valuable urban park-and-grab territory with caches that are “barricaded behind complicated hoops and barrels.” 😈 Third, since we’ve made such a big stink about “quality,” I suppose we better put our caches where our mouth is…uh…or something like that. And fourth, well, we just like the tough ones.
On the Left Side of the Road...
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.