Why I voted "NO" to logging temps

[Team Honeybunnies]

Everyone’s opinions have been well-reasoned and well thought out… but also pretty one-sided. Seeing as this may be the last time this is discussed, in all fairness I’d be interested in hearing a rebuttal from some of the people this would affect most. The last couple times this has come up, there has been some righteous indignation and some views from the moderates, but no balancing opinions.

[Timberline Echoes]

Ralph you did a great job. Read the whole thing twice and agree with you whole heartedly. Things change as the sport evolves.

We also were told at our first event that it was the way things were done. After attending a few more events, working our butts off doing some really great caches we became aware of the conflict. We also realized that we enjoyed the socializing part of the events even more than the cache finding so stopped doing temps. We have not deleted the ones we did log, maybe as a way of showing our neutrality on the conflict as we don’t have a problem with others logging it.

I Mrs TE am also rethinking the logging on of “discovered” coins. It is not the same for me to have someone hand me a list, or sit and copy a multitude of coin numbers. We started doing it with a coin or two that someone carried on a key chain to remember who they met. Now it has turned into a mega thing that almost seems unethical to me. Mr TE does not feel the same as me and he said if I posted it to make that clear. Either way I enjoy looking at coins, have collected a few but from now on my logs will only be for those I have found out in the wild.

[Team Deejay]

@rogheff wrote:

Why not cross post the events on sites other than Groundspeak and post the temps where they’re allowed. You want to log the temps – go right ahead.

You have to understand why people post temporary finds to understand why this wouldn’t actually work. There are several websites out there (besides geocaching.com) which people use to compare their “numbers” to other people. Zuma mentioned one above along with the Grand High Pobah and It’s Not About The Numbers sites listed on the left. These sites all depend, one way or another, on getting their data from GC.com. If the temp finds were posted on Navicache or Terracache, these tracking sites would not count those logs.

Now, maybe the question you should have asked was, “Can we get the WGA events crossposted to Navicache as I prefer to log my finds there?” Assuming you are actually planning to attend the event, I’d suggest you direct this question to the event chairman, who might very well be able to accommodate you.

[marc_54140]

I voted to allow logging temps.

If you do not want to log temps, than do not. Allow anyone who wants to do so.

[manparuby]

When we first became involved in geocaching, we also were instructed how to log the temps we found that day. There were 50 available, but we only got 30 or so. We assumed everyone logged them, and everyone at that event did. It wasn’t until last fall at the WGA event, after we had missed lunch, as we were out caching at the far ends of the park, that we heard the RUMBLINGS about NOT logging temporary caches. The people talking about it said it didn’t matter to them whether people logged them or not, but they would NOT log the temps, therefore, only did a few and went to do permanent caches instead, although stayed to enjoy the company.

At the first event we attended, the caches were spread out over a large area, however, they were easy caches. We felt like kids in a candy store. However, at the WGA event last fall, the caches were NOT on easy terrain and were excellent caches, just as tough, if not tougher, to get as other permanent caches. We, therefore, felt no qualms logging those caches.

We, too, voted to allow logging of temporary caches, but we would still attend WGA events. I think it is unfortunate to see politics involved in this great group!

[jenhen1]

Zuma, an extremely well written and compelling argument. I’m sold!

It’s high time the WGA takes a strong stance on this issue. By condoning and basically encouraging this practice it smears the organization in the eyes of (I believe) the majority of geocachers not only in the state of Wisconsin but around the country as well. I’m pretty sure the majority of geocachers don’t agree with the practice and I feel the stance of the WGA should perhaps reflect that.

For events not put on by the WGA, log away. Let the individuals deal with the criticism. Most don’t care what anyone else says anyway, so let them play their game the way they want.

[One Paddle Short]

Zuma,

Thanks for taking the time to write out such a thorough explanation of your position. We agree with most everything you’ve written and have voted as you have. I think I’ve made my position on this topic known in the past and will leave it at that.

[Natloh2]

I voted to log temps.

I have in the past logged temp caches and I will continue to log temp caches, as long as they are available to log. I have become more selective logging temp caches, in my opinion if a temp is worthy of a permanent cache I will log it. This is my game, and I don’t think in my opinion a minority group of geocachers, but very vocal group will sway me to do it there way. If WI Geocaching Association members vote one way other then the board should proceed as the member’s recommendation.

2.5 cents

[cheezehead]

Ya know, it’s kind of a mute point until GC.com makes it so you can only log one find/attended a cache/event. How is the WGA going to prevent multiple “attended logs”? Will it be up to the Reviewers to go in and change a log? Is a secret Geo-police going to be formed? Until GC.com changes it’s system, there is now way to stop the practice( At least I don’t think there is…….)

By the way I voted no and I have never been to a WGA event either.

[Miata]

No offense intended Ralph. I just couldn’t resist. 😈

[marc_54140]

Overkill?

[Miata]

@marc_54140 wrote:

Overkill?

yeah, maybe a little…. 😳

[ecorangers]

Two Things:
Multiple logging’s at WGA events have slowly decreased over the years? Why? I believe that it could have been due to the fact that 1) the event was held in September rather than August and fewer cachers attended than normal, 2) the terrain difficulty at the last picnic was very challenging thus total finds were down all around, and 3) people weren’t wanting to drive so far to attend the event????

Second thing: I’m confused (not everyone has to laugh at once here). While registering for the WGA campout, I read in two different places that temp. caches would be available for the campout AND they are looking for volunteers to hide temp caches at the picnic? So when will we know if they are going to be temp caches at either the campout or picnic?

Easy Solution: As I’ve posted repeatedly on the forumns, groundspeak should let Wisconsin events log event caches like they do for CITO events. You have the option to log “an attended” and option to log “found it.”
If there was ONE WGA boardmember who would contact groundspeak and suggest this to them, maybe it would work.

I remember quoting Jeremy Irish saying something like, “he’s not losing sleep over Wisconsin logging temp. caches, I’m not losing sleep over my logging temp. caches but why are you losing sleep over it? Tami

Lastly, what if a WGA member hosts their own event and has the WGA logo (or whatever you call it saying I’m a member of the WGA), on their event page…are you going to ask them not to put the WGA endorsement on their cache page?

[zuma]

@ecorangers wrote:

Two Things:
Multiple logging’s at WGA events have slowly decreased over the years? Why? I believe that it could have been due to the fact that 1) the event was held in September rather than August and fewer cachers attended than normal, 2) the terrain difficulty at the last picnic was very challenging thus total finds were down all around, and 3) people weren’t wanting to drive so far to attend the event????

Hi Tami,

Thanks a lot for posting your thoughts. One of the things that has made the process difficult for me to to move towards wanting to cease the practice of multiple logging of temps is the deep respect that I have for you and Wade, and the other folks that still want to continue this practice. I am very glad that you didnt see this inititive as personal, since many of us on the Board are good friends with the handful of people still logging temps.

To answer your question, the factors that you mention probably were factors in the gradual decrease, and it is hard to know what factor was the most important. Other factors probably include the growing awareness that logging multiple “attended” logs is not in favor with Groundspeak and each year is subjected to ever more critisizm from other cachers, both here in Wisconsin and in the gc.com forums.

Another factor could be that for the last several events 0 of 9 WGA Board members have been logging multiple attended logs. Whereas in the past it was the practice of the WGA Board members to log multiple “found” logs, so I think there has been a gradual change over time on this among the Board, and leadership by example.

Second thing: I’m confused (not everyone has to laugh at once here). While registering for the WGA campout, I read in two different places that temp. caches would be available for the campout AND they are looking for volunteers to hide temp caches at the picnic? So when will we know if they are going to be temp caches at either the campout or picnic?

There will be temps at the next event. After this referendum is completed, the Board will be considering what action, if any, we want to take on the issue, using the referendum as guidance.

zuma

[TyeDyeSkyGuy]

I have noticed a trend here that I wonder if anyone else has.

There are many supporters of logging multiple caches at an event. And, as I’ve said, I have no problem with it, in fact I encourage it. So…

“Why Jay, have you voted against logging multiple attended logs at events?” some of you might ask.

Simply because it’s possible to log all of your finds at an event individually, without logging multiple attended.

“How Jay?” you might say.

And I’d reply, “By using the ‘write note’ selection instead.”

This way, we can all show just how much we appreciate each individual cache that we found at the event by writing something about each one in an individual log, and at the same time not have out-of-staters looking down their noses at us. I for one would rather that the cachers from the other 49 states and the rest of the world don’t look at us all as a group, and think “hey, those are the cheaters in WI, why would we ever want to cache with them.” Or “Why would we ever want to hold our Mega-event with those number bloaters.”

Sure, absolutely, I’d like very much to have those finds reflected in my find count since I put forth the effort. But the simple fact, as Team Deejay pointed out, is that this is NOT how Groundspeak wants it. And, since these listings are posted on Groundspeak, we should abide by their rules – or- we should appeal to Groundspeak to have those rules changed.

Still, I support anyone who still wants to log these multiple attended, because it is acceptable here. But why only here? What makes us soooooo special?

[Author]

Posts