This topic contains 104 replies, has 46 voices, and was last updated by 
GrouseTales 19 years, 8 months ago.
-
Posts
-
Another unintended effect is that if multiple finds AREN’T allowed, people hosting events are less likely to hide large amounts of temporary caches. Why go through the trouble of planting 30-40 temps if people can’t log them? People would ignore the temps and only do the full-time caches in the same area to get the finds.
For those of us who live in rural areas and have exhausted local caches, events give us a chance to Geocache without having to travel great distances.
I view this issue as being driven by outsiders to conform to their way of doing things. JO in NB went to an event where the other six attendees each logged one attended. AH went to a huge event in RX with 28 others who each logged their one attended. No temps, no multiple logs, just a bunch of people gathered around a camp fire and complaining about the FUN we have at WGA events.
We are not talking about a change of rules here, we are talking about how we plan our parties. We should not feel obligated to do it the way the rest of the world does it or says we should do it. These are our events. They have been done this way since 2001. Thjeir popularity has grown to the point where we are bringing several scores of cachers and they are coming from greater distances than ever before. Why, because we are having FUN. Change the formula and we can all be doing what they do in other states. WGA events are great the way they are. We don’t need to listen to a bunch of winers on gc.com complaining about right or wrong. What is wrong with our events? Some people can’t get to them. What is right about them? They are enjoyed by all who attend.
Interesting topic indeed. My opinion is that since there is no rule currently in place at Geocaching.com that says you cannot log multiple finds, why should the WGA make up a rule?
It seems the best idea would be to change the “Attend” to read “Event Hides Found”. We all agree that logging “Attended” is a silly way to do it. Why can’t they make this modification?
I really don’t care what people in other states think about the way we log our finds. The first 5 words in the Beasts predictions thread hit the nail on the head “It’s all about the numbers”. People in other states are jealous that so many people in Wisconsin are putting out the numbers we are. Apparently we just have nothing better to do around here
I say leave the regulation out of it and let people log as they see fit. If Jeremy wanted to have a rule stating no multiple logs, then there would be one and we would be abiding by it.
Since this rule would only apply to WGA sponsored events it really won’t cut down on what people in other states see as the problem anyway. In fact, it may compound it even more. They will start asking why people can only log one find at an “official” event but can go grab 30-40 the next weekend at a “non-official” one.
I have added my gas to the thread, who has the matches?
Don from AstroD-Team
Have to agree with T&TB. Like I mentioned in my earlier post. I checked out some events around the country and all they are is get togethers with no caching mentioned. I still think it’s a jealousy thing .
Neener neener neeeeeeeener
I’m bad… I know!!
[This message has been edited by Cache_boppin_BunnyFuFu (edited 07-28-2005).]
It seems fairly well divided down the middle for those that want to log multiple finds at Events, and those that don’t. The good thing is, the WGA can make both sides happy by NOT implementing a rule that clearly half the members don’t like. Those that do not want to record Multiple finds can do just that, those that want to, can. My biggest concern with making such a rule would be that many of those cachers that like logging the numbers, come to Events so they can increase their finds quickly. Take that away from them, and many will NOT show up at Events any more. When that occurs, what have you really accomplished? I think someone else mentioned it already, but “What’s the purpose of an Event anyhow”? To Socalize? Cache? or Both? If it’s simply to Socalize, then don’t have Temp Caches. If it’s to Cache & Socalize, then not allowing finds to be recorded seems counterproductive to me. Obviously my vote is to allow finds to be recorded if a cacher wants to. What’s it really hurting?
Good discussion so far. But it’s too bad we have to have it again and again. Why doesn’t GC.com just add a new log entry for event caches (“found temporary”) and track temporaries separate from events just as they have separate categories for other cache types like multi’s, virtuals and letterboxes. I would think this would end the controversy once and for all. I assume people have asked GC.com management about doing this. What has their response been?
I argued in the past that temporaries are their own beast (see my comments near the end of this topic on 12/8/04: http://www.wi-geocaching.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/000639.html). I would support a 1 log per event decision, but would prefer a gc.com solution.
Excellent, excellent discussion folks !! Some really good comments so far. I appreciate the thoughts w/o any flames .
keep’em coming
quote:
Originally posted by abcdmCachers:
[BWhy doesn’t GC.com just add a new log entry for event caches (“found temporary”) and track temporaries separate from events just as they have separate categories for other cache types like multi’s, virtuals and letterboxes. I would think this would end the controversy once and for all. I assume people have asked GC.com management about doing this. What has their response been?I (and others) suggested it in the Ridiulous numbers thread that popped up after the campout. Here was Jeremy’s response:
quote:
QUOTE (Docapi @ Jun 6 2005, 09:37 AM)
I know what I was suggesting was adding an option when logging on an event page in the drop down list like “Event Cache Found” or something similar. When it shows in our stats it could have a different icon for caches found at events.No. No temporary caches. No special log type. No “count” find for caches found during an event. I don’t know how much clearer I need to be.
Jeremy Irish
Groundspeak – The Language of Locationâ„¢He doesn’t seem interested in resolving the issue. It seems that he would rather have the forum angst come up every time it happens.
His responses in that thread he statwed that he felt it was “trivial” “stupid” and “selfishness”, yet he refuses to come down firmly on one side or another.
I think he somehow enjoys the angst, since he could easily put a stop to it one way or another if he wanted, yet lets the debate rage on.
We aren’t going to get any help there.
Since, in the greater scheme of things, find count really doesn’t mean anything (and I can be a very compettive cacher when it comes to numbers, so I know that numbers mean something on a personal level) what does it matter — people can do whatever they want.
Some people claim finds on their own caches….
Some people claim multiple finds on caches for each time they have visited it…
Some people claim finds when they didn’t find the cache, but know where it was supposed to be…It might come down to a matter of conformity — or not. Do we want to do what everyone else does and avoid the complaints of other cachers from other states? When you play golf, or basketball, or whatever, does it really matter if you “fudge” the numbers a bit? Are you having fun? I think that’s what really matters.
If I become one of the top cachers and a majority of my finds are from events, have I really spoiled the sport/game/hobby for every other geocacher? Does my find count really have that much of an impact in YOUR life?
Some people go on major caching sprees and take a long time to log their finds — some can’t even remember all the caches they did find? Should they be reprimanded for not being accurate in their find counts? They’re not claiming all their finds — I don’t know how many caches they’ve actually found!! How can I ever find more caches than them?
Just food for thought from me. It’s kind of cheesy, isn’t it?
Bec
[This message has been edited by greyhounder (edited 07-29-2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by AstroD-Team:
I have added my gas to the thread, who has the matches?Don from AstroD-Team
quote:
Originally posted by Cache_boppin_BunnyFuFu:
Have to agree with T&TB… I still think it’s a jealousy thing .Neener neener neeeeeeeener
I think the bunny likes playing with matches, but I prefer my torch
I don’t read gc’s board as it didn’t impress me with the whiners that complain about the most ridiculous things, case in point.
so if we submit a bunch of super easy drive-by micro’s before an event and archive them after it would be OK? or how about we hold 20 events .1 miles from each other?(not that they woiuld get approved) ok now i’m being ridiculous.
could you please pass me some firewood?
[This message has been edited by Really I’m Not Lost (edited 07-30-2005).]
1 Find=1 Log!
End of story.
Uncle_Fun
It seems interesting that we have Jeep TBs and Project APE caches and talk of podcast caches, all interesting but fluff, yet we can’t get the higher ups to fill the needs of the community(referencing Docapi’s post). I enjoyed meeting everybody at the event we attended, but we were there to cache, just like everybody else. If I were not at an event and somebody gave me coordinates to a cache that did not show up on my stats and wasn’t acknowledged by GC.com I probably wouldn’t do it. There are too many to do yet that do show up.
Other states events seem to revolve around socializing and oh yeah, there are some caches nearby. I don’t think GC ever anticipated events like ours and needs to be a living, breathing, evolving organism. Correct me if I’m wrong. Be cool Honeybunny!quote:
Originally posted by Team Honeybunnies:
…and needs to be a living, breathing, evolving organism. …There it is. That’s the real key, I think.
Geocaching started with a guy, a 5-gallon bucket, and some posted coordinates. If the purists REALLY want to keep it pure, where are the 5-gallon buckets? Why are there Travel Bugs? Why are there Event Caches? Why are there Micro’s? Why was a “Small” size created?
None of these things were there in the beginning of geocaching.
But a need for them was seen, and they were created. Well, guess what Jeremy — maybe there’s a NEED to evolve this whole Event cache situation as well ! If we’re going to define geocaches as we have, then the temporary finds hidden at event caches DO qualify. Therefore, there needs to be a way to log EACH ONE of them and receive credit for finding them.
It’s not (necessarily) that we NEED those finds to make an event successful. But if you can draw more people to them by making the caches log-able, then that seems to be a plus. Heck, a store with good products should not need to have a sale. But they know that they need something more to draw in people. There is so much competition for a person’s time these days that there needs to be a reason to do something. To me, part of the reason of going to an event cache is to get more finds. No — it’s not the WHOLE reason. But it is definitely a part.quote:
Originally posted by fishcachers:
All I’m going to add is that this is the most interesting and sane discussion I’ve seen on this topic yet. Awesome!~MF
Wow!!! The interesting-ness and sane-ness continues!!!! This is fantastic!!! Lots of great food-for-thought!
~MF
quote:
Originally posted by greyhounder:
Since, in the greater scheme of things, find count really doesn’t mean anything (and I can be a very compettive cacher when it comes to numbers, so I know that numbers mean something on a personal level) what does it matter — people can do whatever they want.Some people claim finds on their own caches….
Some people claim multiple finds on caches for each time they have visited it…
Some people claim finds when they didn’t find the cache, but know where it was supposed to be…It might come down to a matter of conformity — or not. Do we want to do what everyone else does and avoid the complaints of other cachers from other states? When you play golf, or basketball, or whatever, does it really matter if you “fudge” the numbers a bit? Are you having fun? I think that’s what really matters.
If I become one of the top cachers and a majority of my finds are from events, have I really spoiled the sport/game/hobby for every other geocacher? Does my find count really have that much of an impact in YOUR life?
Some people go on major caching sprees and take a long time to log their finds — some can’t even remember all the caches they did find? Should they be reprimanded for not being accurate in their find counts? They’re not claiming all their finds — I don’t know how many caches they’ve actually found!! How can I ever find more caches than them?
Just food for thought from me. It’s kind of cheesy, isn’t it?
Bec
[This message has been edited by greyhounder (edited 07-29-2005).]
Bec, I like your post a lot. That really made a lot of sense to me.
I say allow the multiple logs if we want and ignore the subject on the gc.com boards because that’s really the only place we get flak from in regards to it. If we don’t get involved in their petty bickering on the subject, they’ll soon learn to let it die.
I’ll have some crackers to go with the cheese.
~MF
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.