Why I voted "NO" to logging temps

[jerrys dad]

@sweetlife wrote:

Easy answer to solve this problem

Every one who attends the event gets a ticket for the general raffle prizes.

Have a seperate raffle with prizes that are only for those who looked for the temps. Not extra chances in the general raffle.

Perfect solution!

[ruff54]

Dad always said, “Fair? A fair is what you go to in the summertime. Now quit whining and get your $@%@ out there.”

Working in public education, sometimes I feel like there’s too much “fair” in today’s society. If a kid tells me its not fair….well….take your ball and go home I guess.

Just my 2 cents.

[PCFrog]

😯

I can’t believe this topic is back…

[Lostby7]

@PCFrog wrote:

😯

I can’t believe this topic is back…

There are not enough rolling eye emoticons to use to ponder why a thread nearly two years dead needed to come back.

[benny7210]

@Lostby7 wrote:

@PCFrog wrote:

😯

I can’t believe this topic is back…

There are not enough rolling eye emoticons to use to ponder why a thread nearly two years dead needed to come back.

AMEN….

[benny7210]

@Lostby7 wrote:

@PCFrog wrote:

😯

I can’t believe this topic is back…

There are not enough rolling eye emoticons to use to ponder why a thread nearly two years dead needed to come back.

AMEN….

[jerrys dad]

Because not all of us have been here that long! Also there were a total of 124 votes cast in that referendum. We have a active membership of 983. The fact that 8% of our membership decided something (voted yes) should tell you this topic will be brought up again!

[Lostby7]

@jerrys dad wrote:

Because not all of us have been here that long! Also there were a total of 124 votes cast in that referendum. We have a active membership of 983. The fact that 8% of our membership decided something (voted yes) should tell you this topic will be brought up again!

The statistics are misleading. If you think only 8% of the “active” membership had a say on this topic you are mistaken. “Active” means I believe they visited the board one time in the past year. The vast majority of these “active” members have posted only a couple of times if at all and likely never even visited a WGA event. The vote was taken by folks who are ACTUALLY ACTIVE (you know, the ones holding the majority of the events in the state and who generally have the most finds and experience with the geocaching community and it’s going-ons) and it showed a clear message.

This topic and vote dealt only with WGA events not other folks events. If you wish to hold an event you can have as many temps as you like and log them as you see fit.

[-cheeto-]

@Lostby7 wrote:

@PCFrog wrote:

😯

I can’t believe this topic is back…

There are not enough rolling eye emoticons to use to ponder why a thread nearly two years dead needed to come back.

Do you think it came back because of your candidates corner question? What did you expect?

Would have been better to start a new thread though… it’s a new decade now. People dress differently than back when that thread was posted.

Speaking of this, did anyone see Conan’s “looking back” segment last night? Hilarious commentary that fits with this quite well 😀

[Lostby7]

@-cheeto- wrote:

@Lostby7 wrote:

@PCFrog wrote:

😯

I can’t believe this topic is back…

There are not enough rolling eye emoticons to use to ponder why a thread nearly two years dead needed to come back.

Do you think it came back because of your candidates corner question? What did you expect?

Would have been better to start a new thread though… it’s a new decade now. People dress differently than back when that thread was posted.

Speaking of this, did anyone see Conan’s “looking back” segment last night? Hilarious commentary that fits with this quite well 😀

It is certainly a result of my question. But it was a question which needed to be asked of the candidates as there are those who will not vote for a candidate who wishes to make the association look badly in the eyes of the rest of the geocaching community…and let’s face it the logging of temps at WGA events did just that.

…and yes a new thread should have been created to address new concerns.

[jerrys dad]

@Lostby7 wrote:

@jerrys dad wrote:

Because not all of us have been here that long! Also there were a total of 124 votes cast in that referendum. We have a active membership of 983. The fact that 8% of our membership decided something (voted yes) should tell you this topic will be brought up again!

the ones holding the majority of the events in the state and who generally have the most finds and experience with the geocaching community and it’s going-ons) and it showed a clear message.

This topic and vote dealt only with WGA events not other folks events. If you wish to hold an event you can have as many temps as you like and log them as you see fit.

So the WGA should only care about what those people with the most finds have to say, nice I’ll stop caring till I hit the top 100. Thanks for the lesson!

[Lostby7]

@jerrys dad wrote:

@Lostby7 wrote:

@jerrys dad wrote:

Because not all of us have been here that long! Also there were a total of 124 votes cast in that referendum. We have a active membership of 983. The fact that 8% of our membership decided something (voted yes) should tell you this topic will be brought up again!

the ones holding the majority of the events in the state and who generally have the most finds and experience with the geocaching community and it’s going-ons) and it showed a clear message.

This topic and vote dealt only with WGA events not other folks events. If you wish to hold an event you can have as many temps as you like and log them as you see fit.

So the WGA should only care about what those people with the most finds have to say, nice I’ll stop caring till I hit the top 100. Thanks for the lesson!

That is not what I said. My post pointed out the misinterpretation of your statistic of 8%, but feel free to take me out of context as much as you like. That concludes my involvement in this topic.

[cheezehead]

There’s a whole lot of taking out of context or expanding on what someone has said lately.
Any WGA vote is only voted upon by a small number of members. So it’s a not a true vote of the masses.

[mizfit]

Guess I’ll jump in with both feet here. I have several points to make, so I apologize for the length of this post.

1. I do not understand the reason for people’s insensitivity and rudeness. I am in no way singling any individual out… merely making an observation and forming my own opinion.

The threads on this forum are much like a television station or a radio station. If you do not care for the programming, you are free to change the station – your choice. If you do not care for the topic of conversation in a thread, you are not obligated to post a response. Feel free to skip over the thread and read/post to a topic that is more to your liking.

2. I found it a bit offensive that the idea of this topic coming up again was an issue. I was not a member of this organization when this topic was previously discussed, so it is not being brought up ‘again’ for me.

As a growing organization desiring to increase its membership, it makes sense that what some folks consider ‘old’ topics or issues will be brought up again. New members bring with them their own opinions and ideas and should be able to voice them, and if that means rehashing some topics, so be it. Did it ever occur to anyone that since the issue is being brought up again, that it was not fully resolved in the first place?

3. The issue of logging temporary cache finds… Regardless of my own personal opinion, I have some understanding of both sides of the issue. In previous posts, there were some good points made concerning why folks should be able to log them and why they should not. The fact remains that whatever opinion we hold here will not do much to change things as the logging for finds is done on GC.com.

Geocaching is many different things to many different people. The rules of the game allow us the flexibility to play in ways that suit our individual preferences, and I am thankful for that. To some, numbers are everything. To others, they mean nothing. Then there are all the rest that fall in-between. Deriving a solution to this issue would be challenging, and would have to be brought up and resolved elsewhere.

4. On to the op’s question which brought this topic up…

“Why should I be penalized for not looking for a temp cache? They (WGA BOD or the Picnic Committee) wanted to make temps “worth something” for finding them. So ya got extra tickets for the drawing. How is that fair?”

I believe I understand what you are saying here. Everyone in attendance received a ticket for a drawing at the event. If you chose to participate in searching for temp caches, you received additional tickets. You feel that receiving additional tickets for this drawing was unfair to those that chose not to search for the temp caches. It gave them an ‘unfair’ advantage, so-to-speak. I can understand why you might feel that way.

If there are going to be prizes at an event, why can’t different activities have different prizes? For instance, why can’t there be a ‘door prize’ for attending. There could be a general raffle that is done because you attended. If there are additional activities then there could be additional drawings or prizes.

A possible answer concerning temporary caches would be to hold separate drawings or give separate prizes to those who chose to participate in searching for them – a chance at winning something ‘extra’ for doing something ‘extra’.

It seems like that may be a solution to appease ‘most of the people, most of the time’.

[cheezehead]

Well said mizfit.

[Author]

Posts