This topic contains 104 replies, has 46 voices, and was last updated by 
GrouseTales 19 years, 8 months ago.
-
Posts
-
The board is dicussing and will vote on allowing multiple attended logs at official WGA events. (This will not affect any other events in the state, only WGA Events.) The decision will take effect on 1/1/06.
Please post your thoughts on the subject here. This is not the place to debate this subject or start a flame war. We are simply giving you, the members, a place to voice your thoughts on this issue prior to our vote.
Back in the day, it seemed perfectly ok to post multiple “Found it” logs for each temporary cache found. Geocaching.com eliminated the “found it” logs for events, and replaced it with “will attend”, “attended”, etc.
To some people, it seems silly to make multiple “attended” logs for each temporary cache found. Other people feel this is still perfectly acceptable.
We all know that WGA events are top notch and the temporary caches usually exceed the standards of caches in other parts of the country. We have unfortunately come under fire in the Geocaching community for allowing this practice on our cache pages.
Please share YOUR feelings on the matter. Again, we are looking for opinions, not to start an arguement.
Should we continue to allow multiple “attended” logs, or limit the logs to one per team?
Brian
GrouseTalesMy individual opinion is this:
In the past I’ve defended our practice of allowing multiple “found it” logs. Our temp caches placed for events are high quality. They by far exceed the quality of the latest trend in geocaching….drive up micros. The majority take more effort to find then the average geocache.
Multiple “attended” logs seems silly. The wording is silly, and it shows up in your stats for events attended.
I’ve personally followed the example of many other geocachers in the are and I’m no longer making multiple logs. One event = one attended log.
I’ve also found myself enjoying the fellowship of other geocachers more, since I’m not busting my but to find as many caches. I think many may choose to slow down and smell the roses if they didnt feel a need to “log” all the finds.
My vote; eliminate multiple logs for future WGA events starting 1/1/96. (unless gc.com changes their log types )
I vote for allowing mulitple logs.
One cache/container searched for and found should equal one log. Being temporary does not change the fact you had to search for it.
Okay, we just attended our first event. The prevailing attitude in WI seems to be that we log all finds at events. We vacillated and hemmed and hawed, and since we are a two person team, we voted on it. Ms. Honeybunny felt we should get credit for every cache we find. If the caches stunk we would never have reached this conclusion. On the other side of the coin, I see the descriptions of other states’ events and I’m surprised that one could get an “event cache”(it is listed as a cache on your account page) for attending an ice cream social. I’m okay with that, but if I spent 8 hours in the car to find 30 event caches, I feel credit is deserved.
This will be a hot topic for sure, but does the onus lay with WGA to determine this or with the big dogs to finally pick a side of the fence. If the decision came down officially that an event is an event whether it is a marathon or the 50 yard dash I would abide by it. I feel if there was a decisive action at the national level you wouldn’t be forced to make a decision that will definitely be controversial among the membership.Maybe if the temporaries weren’t so good we wouldn’t feel so strongly about logging each one. I’m starting to feel strongly toward the one event = one find. The only reason I don’t like this is because the individual logs are sort of like a testament to good hides.
If m ore people from other states would come to one of our events, they would understand our dilemma.
Bec
when i was into logging more and higher numbers, i would have gone with the folks who want multiple logs for events. but something happened this summer after i hit 500. it just doesn’t seem to really matter. i like attending the events and finding the different types of caches, but it is so hard to stop before finding them all. i think with only logging the event once, i’d be able to stop before i ended up limping for the next week.
On May 3rd, 2000 when Mike Teague found the first geocache, he signed its logbook (logged it). Two months later, Jeremy Irish found his first geocache, and approached Teague with a new website design that added ‘virtual logs’. The point is, from the start, geocache finds were Logged.
The official ‘rules’ on geocaching.com for the activity of geocaching include: 3. Write about it in the logbook. The aspect of logging is, and always has been, integral to geocaching.
As we are all in agreement that the event geocaches at WGA events are every bit as high in quality as the average stand alone geocache, and better than many, there is no valid argument that we should not log the event geocaches we find because they are too easy and used just to inflate counts.
There are many metro areas with such high geocache densities that someone wishing to inflate their counts can easily do so in a day’s hunting without having to wait for and attend a WGA event.
So this leaves only one argument against the logging of event geocaches that I can see; that events are exactly that, social events, with a primary purpose of the gathering, and not geocaching. If this is the bottom line argument, then I would counter that events should then eliminate all geocaching and be purely a gathering.
If socialization is the goal of events, then that is what should take place. Hold an event that is a picnic or campout, and see if people are interested in attending for just the purpose of socializing.
But if geocaching is going to be included, then the integral aspect of logging those finds must be available. There is no logically valid argument to exclude documenting the finds.
If attending the event is the sole aspect that can be logged, then that’s all that should be offered; the event.
If geocaching is offered, then logging finds is integral.My Vote:
If the board decides to eliminate multiple logs, then also decide to eliminate temp caches at WGA events. Make them purely social.My vote is for keeping the option for the geocacher to log the temp hides.
Like agreeing with others here, If you got to work hard and take most of the day to find caches, you should get credit and be able to log these caches. We have allways, and will in the future have excellent cache hiding and the hiding personnel take care in the hiding process for these events. So they by far excede some hiding spots of real caches I found.
Just my 2 cents worth
Smokey
“Be safe and Keep on Searchin”I agree with CachCows.If temp caches are there to be found ,we should be able to claim them. Otherwise, have a social only event.
For my answer I want to split the question into
1.Temps are not worthy.
2.‘Attended’ doesn’t work.After spending Sunday with 5 other teams in 95 degree heat making sure that the temps for the picnic are worthy makes that part of the argument void in my mind.
While there, I saw some of the work done for the Green Bay event, held the previous day and was similarly impressed. These caches are/will be just as huntable, fun and log-able as typical ‘approved’ caches.
Now the second part of the question. For a living I used to develop factory control software. We had to remember (but often forgot):
the software is there to serve the factory, the factory is not there to serve the software
Just because geocaching.com has an inadequate approach to this dilemma is not the fault of the geocaching community. It is a weakness of geocaching.com. ‘Attended’ is a work around for flawed software. This is just one of the weaknesses… don’t get me started on the others .
Assuming that nothing changes at geocaching.com to support ‘social caches’, ‘performance caches’, ‘temp caches’, whatever you want to call them, I vote to continue the work around at the discretion of the finder.
A tough issue, at least inside my head.
My “list of thoughts”:1. Why did GC eliminate “found it” from
events, unless we should stop logging
the finds? While we don’t agree here
in Wisconsin and in theory can do what
we want all games have rules and I sort
of feel that GC makes the rules.2. I think all caches should count as a
cache found. Just because I didn’t
have to make multiple road trips does
not make the cache any less a cache.
Now of course, one could go back to the
rules and say then all temps must be
at least 1/10th mile apart. That’s
something new to chew on.3. I’ve got to the point of not caring too
much in either direction. I truely do
not watch my numbers any more, nor do
I watch the numbers of some of the “big
hitters”. I have nothing against big
numbers, I just don’t pay attention to
that anymore.4. Since it’s not a big deal to me, in my
case, I’d welcome being told what the
“Official WGA” Decision is. Takes the
pressure off of deciding what to do.
But at the same time, I’m not going to
concern myself with those that choose
to live outside the WGA box. Let’s
also remember that not everyone in WI
checks out what’s going on at WGA, so
not everyone is even aware of this
issue or any future decision.Oh yes, my vote … I guess put my in favor of “one log per temp found”, since I’d have to say I’m 60/40 in favor of that viewpoint.
I like to be able to log all the caches found at an event if they are actual hides. Finding a store or the 12 bug salad dessert to me isn’t a logable find. (My bad for logging a few of these types of things when I started out…have had a change of heart since.) Just making the real hides where a GPS is needed loggable would be swell.
[This message has been edited by Lostby7 (edited 07-27-2005).]
Hmmmm. This makes me wonder. Is the WGA attempting to become more aligned with the rules of geocaching.com?
Here is past discussion re this issue on WGA. http://www.wi-geocaching.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/000639.html
Ok, here is my two cents worth. Does it really matter? If people are logging temp caches to up their numbers to make them feel good because their numbers go up, let them. To me the fun in caching is the hunt, not necessarily the find. I have spent days looking for caches and not finding them, but to tell you the truth, I have had more fun not finding some caches than finding others. If a person wants to spend an hour or so logging temps and it makes them happy, so be it. Personally, I don’t want to spend the time after I come home from an event saying I found number one, number two, etc. for the 40 or so caches I found at an event. I would rather say thanks to the people hosting the event and just log finding the event itself. Some events, and I admit, I haven’t been to too many, end up being, “well here is a group of people passing a log around, the cache must have been here somewhere”, and whom ever signs it last puts it back. To me that is not finding a cache. If I had to look and find at least one cache at an event, without the help of anyone, than I think I can justify, to myself, the logging of the event as a cache.
You may all boo me now.
Decrepit
To me, this is an incredibly easy one:
It is a “log-able” cache if…
1) it requires a GPSr to find it
2) there is a way to prove you were there (either by signing a log book, e-mailing a virification answer to the hider as in virts, or by stamping your logbook with a stamp that was in the cache.)
That’s it. Just those two things. It doesn’t matter if it’s in the middle of a woods all by itself, if it’s under a park bench in Central Park, taped to a stoplight, in a Walmart parking lot, or a temp hide at an event. If it meets those TWO criteria, it is a log-able cache and should be allowed.
Now — if GC.com doesn’t want to allow multiple “Found It’s” and we have to use multiple “Attended”‘s then OK. So be it. That’s just a matter of symantics. I don’t care what you want to call it as long as I get “credit” for “finding” that cache.
I know — there are a lot of quotes up there. That’s only because this whole “game” has gotten stuck on defining everything. If I don’t use quotes, one of my definitions will surely be “wrong”. .
OK — you ask, “what will you do if they stop allowing credit for multiple “finds” at an event?”
Well, frankly, I probably WOULD be less inclined to go. Yes the comraderie (sp?) is great! Putting a face to an online “handle” is fun! Seeing a new park in detail is terrific! But I COULD spend that same amount of time doing “log-able” caches elsewhere just as easily!There’s my $.02 Well — it’s my $.04 but it’s on sale tonight.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.