This topic contains 32 replies, has 15 voices, and was last updated by 
-
Posts
-
I know it’s opening a can of worms, but there are times when I feel so violated, that I just have to vent a little.
As many of you know or have come to realize, I put serious time into each one of my puzzle caches. A few of them, like the Camelback Cinema series, require a ton of time to solve and are tough final hides as well.
When a group comes through town to log a bunch of puzzle caches that only a few of the group members has solved, it stings a little. Especially when I know that the final location was probably not visited by all the loggers or that the clue to solve a puzzle was probably not seen by the finders of the final, either.
Now. I might be jumping to conclusions and I have certainly been proven wrong in the past, but I do feel like some of the recent “found it” logs on a couple of my tough ones of late were not fully deserved.
However, everyone plays the game how they want and if you shortcut an s|s solve or an s|s find, then you’re just cheating yourself. The sting of the specific logs will subside and I will soon forget about them. What does linger is the knowledge that some of you aren’t getting as much out of s|s caches as what I put into them and the sweat reward of going the distance – and that’s an awareness I can’t shake.
SO PLEASE, I implore you. If you are going to go on a puzzle run and are going to be visiting any of mine, SOLVE THE PUZZLE FIRST!!!! and PUT YOUR HANDS on the final. I know it’s not always possible, but is there any reason why you can’t let a few blue ?’s stay on your not found page?
Thanks for listening and I’m done venting now.
Much like the challenge of a 5 terrain cache, the satisfaction comes in doing it yourself and actually earning the find. I only have a couple high difficulty or terrain caches and appreciate the discretion of those who have solved or found those, and am williing to give some assistance to keep someone who really wants to make a find from just giving up in total frustration. Those caches are meant to be found, not hidden to become time capsules for posterity or lonely on purpose, but the difficulty or terrain does mean they are not park ‘n grabs.
@seldom|seen wrote:
you’re just cheating yourself.
This is really the point. We do still get annoyed when people shortcut one of our challenging puzzles (or multis). And when we put 20+ hours (probably more like 40+ hours) into solving a puzzle like “Carol” and then see a “big arse group” (to use their term) go slam it, well it does initially cheapen it. And yes, I know many people in that BAG are in these forums, and this is not a personal attack, it’s just a difference in philosophy.
Fortunately, those nasty thoughts diminish quickly because ultimately we play this game for our own reasons, not for someone else’s reasons. So as we occasionally look over our past puzzle finds we have not only a lot to remember about the solve and the find, but also the satisfaction at knowing that we were able to solve them.
On the other hand, there are those who are, as they will admit, “numbers people” to whom seeing their find ticker go up is more important and satisfying or who are, as you say, simply bothered by having stuff show up in their “nearest unfound caches” search.
It’s kinda like philosophies regarding weekend golf. Do you play by the rules so that when you do score that personal best round, you can keep your card and be proud of an honest score? Or do you throw in a bunch of mulligans and hand-wedges just to break 100 (or whatever).
For us, being part of a puzzle tour where we didn’t make the solve would be like catching a ride with Rosie Ruiz to the end of a marathon. Why bother? For other folks it’s different. Viva la difference.
On the Left Side of the Road...It’s all the way you play the game ……..
There are some puzzles I can solve on my own. Some I need some help with. And others I can not figure out at all.
I have no problem asking for help when I need it. I will continue this behavior.
Ultimately, each cacher has to decide for him or herself if finding the cache or solving the puzzle, or both, is what he or she feels is necessary when logging a find. For me, a find is a find. And that is, after all, the standard definition of finding a cache – find the container.
If a cache owner wants to be picky, and stick in some meaningless requirements, go ahead.
Alex, you specifically, need to lighten up. That’s MY opinion.
You have some great hides, containers, etc. Do you not want a lot of cachers to find them, and enjoy them? Since most of your best hides are puzzles, a vast percentage of cachers will never solve them. Even veteran puzzle solvers can be stumped by the twisted logic you use in them.
I guess I’ll take a look at my Ignore List again ……
😥
SS,
Up until recently I felt the same way you did. But the fact is, people do these things, and no matter what we say or do, they will continue to. This is a big part of the reason I started my Riddler series of caches. I figured they could cheat the puzzle, but when they got on-site, they would have a whole other puzzle to deal with. This worked great for a long time because even if it took 5 people to solve the puzzle on-site, they got to work together and still solve it. Then the caches started disappearing and being damaged by those that could not open them. The rest is history, and now too is that series.
I now find satisfaction and fulfillment knowing that even if someone short-cuts one of my puzzles, they’re getting out of it only what they put into it. If that’s good enough for them so be it. But when some day, there is a group standing together at one of my events, or any other for that matter, and we’re all talking about one of my puzzles, these will be the same people that back away, attempt to change the subject, or make a comment that blows their cover. Then I get my laugh. Not that this has ever happened of course. 😉 😀
That being said, I have short-cut a few puzzles myself when out caching with a group. But I believe that on every occasion, I’ve gone back and solved the puzzle myself. I like puzzles, what can I say?
To each his own…
…but I’m watching. 😉 😆
@marc_54140 wrote:
And others I can not figure out at all.
Then why not just leave those ones unfound? I guess that’s what I don’t understand about some players. A puzzle creator does not create a complex puzzle so others can simply ask someone else who spent umpteen hours solving it for the solution. YOU of all people, Marc, should understand this.
I have no problem asking for help when I need it. I will continue this behavior.
Asking for help is fine. Asking for a clue on how to solve a puzzle is fine too. Asking for the final location because you can’t see the clue needed to solve the puzzle is, IMHO, not the same thing.
Ultimately, each cacher has to decide for him or herself if finding the cache or solving the puzzle, or both, is what he or she feels is necessary when logging a find. For me, a find is a find. And that is, after all, the standard definition of finding a cache – find the container.
If a cache owner wants to be picky, and stick in some meaningless requirements, go ahead.
Wow. So what you are saying is that it doesn’t matter to you what the puzzle is or what the intent of the puzzle creator is, it doesn’t really matter as long as you can log the final and get it off your nearest to home list. Way to show your true colors.
You have some great hides, containers, etc. Do you not want a lot of cachers to find them, and enjoy them?
NO, I would much rather have 5 cachers put in the time to solve a cache and work for the find than have 35 cachers get it by touring. Those 5 solvers will remember what they went through to get the find and will likely remember the content to the listing while the 35 cachers will forget what the cache was about soon after they publish their hollow “find it while out touring the valley” logs.
Since most of your best hides are puzzles, a vast percentage of cachers will never solve them. Even veteran puzzle solvers can be stumped by the twisted logic you use in them.
I guess I’ll take a look at my Ignore List again ……
Man, wouldn’t that be sweet, to have all of mine on Marc’s ignore list. I couldn’t ask for anything more!
I can understand your frustration, Alex, but I would like to point out that most, if not all of the cachers that were on the tour that had not solved the puzzles, will never solve the puzzles. Like Marc said, at least they get to enjoy part of the trip.
I haven’t logged the two puzzle caches of Marc’s that we stopped at because I still can’t figure out what all those pictures mean… When I do, I’ll log the find, but won’t have to take the trip back to Appleton. The tour was very much appreciated, but perhaps for a different reason than others.@Team Black-Cat wrote:
Like Marc said, at least they get to enjoy part of the trip.
OK. But what did you enjoy about logging a puzzle that you didn’t solve. I don’t understand. If it was just to get a number, aren’t there tons of other caches in the valley you could have visited instead? Wouldn’t a tour of traditionals or multi’s have been just as rewarding?
@seldom|seen wrote:
@Team Black-Cat wrote:
Like Marc said, at least they get to enjoy part of the trip.
OK. But what did you enjoy about logging a puzzle that you didn’t solve. I don’t understand. If it was just to get a number, aren’t there tons of other caches in the valley you could have visited instead? Wouldn’t a tour of traditionals or multi’s have been just as rewarding?
As I said, I did not log them. I’m not even defending anyone that did. I guess my point was that having someone log a puzzle they will never solve doesn’t cheapen the puzzle or the hide. I will concede that a puzzle with few finds might be more attractive to some, but that would be a pretty small minority.
I only have a handful of puzzles, but I know that the solution for one was shared freely. I decided then not to get upset about it because it’s just gonna happen.
I place caches to be found. How they are found does not concern me.
If you really want each finder to solve your puzzles, then you need to add a requirement to the cache page that asks for a sworn, notarized statement that the logger did solve the puzzle. (Lots of sarcasm here. I will notarize anyone’s statement ……..!)
It really is All About the Numbers man! I want to clear them off my radar screen.
Marc, aren’t you supposed to be eating pizza?
@marc_54140 wrote:
And that is, after all, the standard definition of finding a cache – find the container.
I want to clear them off my radar screen.
Hmmm. This definition to me is like drinking decaf coffee. Why bother?
Back to my marathon example. The objective of a marathon is to cross the finish line. Now, I am not a competitive runner and I harm absolutely no one if I cut a few miles off the course. It would sure be easier, and I’d get my finisher’s medal just like everyone else (if no one caught me!).
But then…why bother? I didn’t run the race as it was designed to be run. And really my medal–my 5/5, if you will–didn’t come with the same effort as everyone else. But hey, my stats are my own, I ran the race the way I wanted to, and I’ve got another marathon off the radar screen.
Whether it’s logging a puzzle one hasn’t solved, shortcutting a difficult multi by just wandering around, hopping a fence to turn a 4-mile walk T4 into a T1, or whatever, one hasn’t found the cache the way the owner intended, and that–in my view–is part of the game too.
@sagasu wrote:
Much like the challenge of a 5 terrain cache, the satisfaction comes in doing it yourself and actually earning the find.
There you have it.
But so far, no one has found a way to make a living off this sport, so it’s all just academic.
On the Left Side of the Road...I guess it doesn’t bother me as much as it does s|s but I see it on my caches too.
If it’s a husband and wife and they both have accounts or two brothers or whatever I’m cool with that. I’m even cool with bending rules now and again to get the solves on other peoples caches.
However, I do believe that endorsing what happened on “Carol for Paprdolls” after the lonely event is not the best way to play the game. Yeah it’s marc’s cache and he can do what he wants but that probably did “sting” and upset other players who legitimately solved that puzzle. Now were comparing apples to oranges here…
There is not even a resemblance between the meaning that is put into a typical s|s puzzle and the absolute lack of meaning that goes into most cryptic marc puzzles. I’m not picking on marc, just contrasting the two types of puzzles.
I am not a fan of cryptic puzzles. I’ve said that many times. I’ve only published a couple that fit this bill myself and one’s long archived because I was not happy with how cryptic it became. I am a huge fan of straight forward puzzles with lots of content and opportunity to learn new things. For me to cut corners on those is a lot like cutting a few miles off that marathon (as gotta run relates too..) Yeah, i’ll cut corners on cryptic number puzzles or decoding puzzles because I don’t really care what the decryption was to be honest. Goes to show you that everyone still plays by their own rules and opinions, likes and dislikes.
-cheeto-
So if a cache owner placed a traditional cache on an island and wanted someone to use a boat to go find the cache. But a finder decided to walk on the ice in the middle of winter to go find the cache, is the finder making the find cheaper for himself? Previous finders?
@Team Hemisphere Dancer wrote:
But a finder decided to walk on the ice in the middle of winter to go find the cache, is the finder making the find cheaper for himself? Previous finders?
Depends. Do the finders need to bring an ATV, ice auger, and underwater camera to find the cache–verus a boat and snorkel in the summer?
Is the risk of falling through the ice and the extra time spent digging a cache out of the snow versus finding it under a log on the island worth the same?
Might actually be harder in the winter. Might be about the same difficulty but different type of difficulty. Might be easier.
Point being…you are talking about a different topic here…hunting caches at night versus the daytime; stormy weather versus sunny skies, etc. Solving a puzzle is a different topic, I would maintain.
On the Left Side of the Road...is the finder making the find cheaper for himself? Previous finders?
I would say it depends! What was the cache owner’s intentions when placing it. Does the cache page mention crossing the ice as an option?
I do think it’s a bit different than working on a puzzle.
Again, would I walk on ice instead of using a boat? Perhaps once as I agree walking on ice is “risky too”. However I usually find the cache using the most “adventurous” means possible. For instance, oasis in menasha. I could have easily jumped off my dad’s boat numerous times as we drove by and made the find. I chose to wait until I could do something a bit “new” and learn a few things along the way….
I think s|s’s point about just ignoring them is a good one. That is what I do with most of the tree climbing caches. I’m afraid of heights (I fell from a roof when I was a kid and got seriously injured), and I am “big” and tall. All attributes that don’t mix well with tree climbing. I will probably never log zoesbro’s tree cache and some of s|s’s tree caches. Do I care that they sit on the map not found? Nope. Other’s can risk limbs and serious injury and I can benefit from reading about their adventures.
A little offtopic here but yet on topic when it comes to simply ignoring puzzles if puzzles aren’t for you. And even if you find yourself in a group caching and the group goes to a puzzle, you can always choose to stay in the vehicle or find another nearby cache or go along and just know that you found a cache and abide by the owner’s wishes, whatever those may be.
There is a difference between this scenario and encouraging finding puzzles that others didn’t solve (i.e. “puzzle tours” where a group “shares their solves” or divides up puzzles and solves a few and you all go and find them all). Of course if you’re in a group and you are driving you could always choose to not do puzzles when you are with others that didn’t work on the puzzle! There’s always next time. That puzzle cache will probably still be there next time and if it’s in my neck of the woods it will probably be lonely.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.