[seldom|seen]

@marc_54140 wrote:

I have 8500 finds, 400 hidden. And I am an associate of Johnny and his TC. I can guess where I fit in.

That’s why you of all people should know better.

I don’t expect to change the caching habits of long-time game players. I do expect cachers who follow these threads to understand where I am coming from, I don’t expect them all to agree.

If your perception is that I am a horse’s arse for expecting people to make an effort to solve my puzzles before they go a hunting, so be it. If you, on the other hand, tend to agree that an effort should be made and I have a right to defend my views, that’s good to. If all that comes out of this is a fence-sitter or two giving it a second thought the next time they read, ‘2020 Puzzle Bus Tour, climb abord and clear the valley of pesky ?’s’ then I’ve accomplished something.

[seldom|seen]

@seldom|seen wrote:

…yet I think you all posted copy-paste “found it”‘s on that cache after your tour.

I did say “I think”, there were a lot of copy paste logs (with a sprinkle of “caught a cattail in the eye” add-ons) to wade through, but excessively little about the puzzles themselves. When I get a slew of logs that all start the same way and look almost identical, I pretty much hit the delete key unless I see a substantial add-on like yours.

@johnney cache wrote:

…it was somewhere around cache 95 of 100+. I was tired. I guess we had gotten too accustomed to nano hides with poor coordinates in uninspiring places.

Even stop to consider this may be intentional? Most of my puzzle caches are all about the puzzle, not the final. If you short-cut the puzzles all you get out of many of them are uninspiring nanos or keyholders stuck in uninspiring urban places. You know that since you’ve done so many of mine. And thanks for the PSA, which I approve. If you find yourself geocaching in the Appleton area with a large group of friends and 80% of you haven’t solved many of the puzzles the other 20% has, please do yourself a favor and skip them until next time, at least those that belong to S|S. You may cheat yourself of a smiley, but at least you aren’t cheating those who found it legitimately.

Thanks for sharing the personal stories of your friends. They are touching and I harbor no ill will to them personally, how could I since I don’t know most of them from Adem. The only frame of reference I have is how they choose to play the game. I pretty sure I witnessed your group short-cut a whole bunch of puzzles to log numbers.

Uncle_Fun, BQ, LostBoyScout and 3Hawks I want to know that I never made any insinuations or intended any defamation of character beyond spelling out the short-cut method you used to find my puzzle caches. You missed out on some challenging and rewarding puzzles in the Valley (Ask Johnny how much fun he had solving them) for the sake of posting a high day of 100 finds and in the process you made those cachers, who spent in many cases hours solving them, feel cheated. I know, I talk to my caching friends too.

You sound like incredible people and I hate being on this side of an issue with you on the other. But, as you can tell, I feel strongly about puzzle solving or at least participating in solving and will continue to be vocal about it no matter who is on the other side. You choose to play the game a certain way that makes others feel less rewarded in the way they choose to play.

I don’t geocache to socialize, many people do and I am quite sure my myopic view of the sport’s reward is quite different that the majority because of this. So yes, perspective is good. Mine is obviously skewed to one end of the spectrum since I have a active placed to found ratio on puzzles of 159 to 126 (more placed than found) and an overall ratio of 957 to 214 active or about 1 cache placed to 4 cahces found. Obviously, we can’t all play that way, it would be super-saturation, and I understand that I am in the minority. But without some of us prolific hiders you numbers guys wouldn’t have many caches to log in the first place.

Perhaps Johnny, if you and your TC’s had a ratio in little more in favor of placed caches to found caches, you wouldn’t consider short-cutting solves as you would more fully appreciate and value of what goes into crafting unique puzzles. After all with a group placed to found ratio of… well, here are your numbers:

Total combined finds for 3Hawks (4749), Uncle_Fun (6632), Bushwhacking Queen (11371), JC and the CC’s (3962), Lost Boyscout (2957) = 29,671

Total active placed caches by 3Hawks (3), Uncle_Fun (33), Bushwhacking Queen (6), JC and the CC’s (0), Lost Boyscout (3) = 45, and of all those only 1 puzzle cache amongst you.

That’s 45 active caches to 29,671 finds. I’d argue that your collective perspective is a little skewed in the opposite direction. Perhaps if we both tracked a little closer to center I wouldn’t have to get so defensive about copy/paste group logging and tour finders might discover that adding a line like “sorry we didn’t solve this one but we know how it is solved and it’s a neat puzzle” would go a long way in keeping puzzles owners and bone fide finders from feeling slighted.

Now are we done?

[seldom|seen]

Looking more and more like I will have to add this one to the to do pile, along with “Marsh to the Philippine Islands”, “You picked… Lucille” and “Hemp Therapy”. I suspect I’ll get to those long before I get to this one as I have to be up here for some “other” non-caching related reason and the only time that happens is summer fishin, so we’ll see…

[seldom|seen]

@Johnny Cache wrote:

This is about more than one cacher or one owner.

Lighten up Johnny. I’m making a point and using your tour group log of a cache that none of you found the final for, nor signed the log-book of, nor bothered to open the Waypoint nano to where you would have discovered you weren’t at the end, yet I think you all posted copy-paste “found it”‘s on that cache after your tour. If any of you would have read through the logs, I can’t see how you wouldn’t have come to the realization that you didn’t complete it. Are you trying to tell me that neither you nor your crew logged “found it’s”? Do I need to post those here?

You’re group is not the first nor will it be the last. It can’t be helped and I know it.

But I think I have made my points clearly and concisely and there are many puzzle cache creators and owners who would back me up as evidenced in this thread. I am not omnipotent and I don’t expect everyone to play by my rules. I am simply trying to define MY personal expectations for those who log my caches.

I expressed my disappointment with your tour, prior to it. But did I not also help you with daily questions on my puzzles all week leading up to it? At what point prior to my realization that you were going to be touring was I not gracious and helpful? Go ahead and pull all the correspondence from those exchanges and post them here if you think it will help your cause.

I have also thanked you both publicly, here, and in private for all the help you have provided on broken links, misspellings, puzzle clarifications. What more do you want from me? Yes, I called you out on that log, but only to counterpoint all the justifications you made in this thread for your tour being status quo and acceptable from any perspective.

Enough said.

[seldom|seen]

I’ve leaned to lean back for a while and let the air clear to avoid the acrid taste of rubber and aged leather.

Being careful not to disparage anyone here, some additional comments on what would mostly be “dittos” in this thread.

Ditto, that the desire to go caching with friends and family can be the most important part of the sport and it shouldn’t stand in the way of preventing a group from logging finals of a puzzle, so long as the finders come away appreciating the intent of the puzzle (if there was one), respecting the desires of the CO (to the extent possible on a group solve), and understanding that (some) puzzle owners may be discouraged or disappointed by group logging. These are not outrageous expectations.

Ditto, that everyone chooses to play the game a certain way, a game where there are no winners, no trophy or prize at the end. The only thing you get from this sport is what you put into it – your return on investment. If what you invest is gas, company and a list of caches to quickly drive to and log, then that’s what you’ll get out of it. A memorable day with friends looking for log books to sign. If what you invest is time and the willpower to slog through a slew of tough puzzles for final cords, then you get something else memorable in the form of what you take away form the puzzle – the fact that you solved it, the knowledge of something historical or educational, or at times the disappointment that there wasn’t anything gained from all that effort, except that log book signature and a few less aspirin in the bottle.

Ditto, that there exists a very wide range of puzzle / mystery classified caches out there, each of which required some effort on the part of the CO to create and maintain – sometimes a few minutes to place a nano on a scoreboard plus a few minutes to create some gibberish to agonize cachers, and at other times hours, days, weeks or even years to research, craft and place a difficult puzzle or create that perfect final container – and to each cache a level of respect commensurate with the investment by the CO to create it should be afforded.

Ditto, every cacher has to make this call for themselves and it will not always be right or fitting or amicable to the CO. That most CO’s I know are happy to help others get the solves, sometimes in baby steps, sometimes outright, and that an effort should be made, at least for CO’s who ask for and welcome it, to contact them first on the process. Not to stroke the CO’s ego but to inform them about problems with puzzles, or to provide other insights the CO may not have seen. The most prolific poster in this thread has been an absolute model cacher in this regard, asking me many questions and providing many corrections, some minor, some major, and I think him for it.

Ditto, that an outright invite to go on a bus tour event and play to the desires of every cacher who would love to clear a couple dozen pesky blue question makes is not good sport. This goes beyond the friends and family circle by opening it up to all cachers (yes Marc, I know your “circle” is wide). But, it might as well be an event (hint). While I think the past group tours among friends diminishes the reward for those non-solvers that participate by eliminating what might have been a memorable or educational process of solving the puzzles, it doesn’t diminish the enjoyment of the hunt among comrades or the feeling of accomplishment for those that contributed in some way to solving them. I would simply suggest that group tours are better suited to traditional and multi hides for the sole reason that you’re not going to stir up CO resentment, which leads to a lot of sore egos (all those the went the distance on the tough solves), which leads to 5-page forum threads, which many feel compelled to contribute to, which leads to lost hours better spent on more important things.

And a big ditto, that there ARE certain expectations about solving puzzles for coordinates just as there are guidelines for placing caches. We’re not all going to follow them to the letter, but the least we can do is recognize that they exist. This idea that CO’s don’t care if their puzzles get solved is a little far-fetched. Perhaps it’s not a big deal to many CO’s (though I suspect most feal a tiny bit cheated when theirs are shortcut), but what then would be the point of creating puzzles in the first place, if no one was expected to solve them? There are many elements to developing and practicing good geocaching ethics. If anything should be getting passed on to newbies, it’s a core group of caching principles. Hide them as you find them (or better if you know they should be), practice a little CITO everywhere you go, trade up or even (unless your intent is to get trackables moving), solves puzzles with the help of the owner first and caching partners second (but don’t just tag-a-long on a group puzzle tour where you contributed nothing (but gas perhaps)… you get the idea.

I don’t think I’ve ever treated anyone unfairly or didn’t call them as I see them. I am opinionated and as a owner of many many puzzle caches which take many many hours each to contemplate, craft and place, I reserve the right to be. Get out of puzzle caching what you put into it but don’t expect every puzzle owner to be pleased as punch if what they invested was exponentially more than you did, as reflected by your non-appreciative, non-engaging, non-inspiring copy-paste logs posted above articulate stories of trail and error, educational adventures both virtual and real and above all, true CO appreciation. If you can live with that, so can I.

Lastly,

If you sign the logbook, you can log the cache online.

If you post a “found it” on a puzzle, the least you can do is read the previous logs before you log it (they are right below where your copy-paste log is about to go) and realize that in your haste to hurry on to the next group puzzle solve skip, group signed log book………. you didn’t. (notice how I got that last dig in there?)

[seldom|seen]

@Team Hemisphere Dancer wrote:

So where is the well written log to show appreciation for the cache placers effort?

@seldom|seen wrote:

(unless you were messing with the owners).

Didn’t realize there was a sore spot here. Obviously it took a little MORE effort to scan and post the certificate than to write a few lines of copy. I thought the owner would appreciate the humorous method of posting the find.

Sorry Hemi, if there’s any residual resentment, not my intent and anyone can visit any other cache I’ve found (Marc-exception) to see that I am usually pretty expressive when I log, even on the simple ones. And, it’s not like I didn’t post something very appropriate and praise-worthy to the cache some time after the FTF…

“
February 23, 2009 by seldom|seen (949 found)
Well, I have not been actively pursuing revisits for the LCG, but this cache in particular is very special and deserves a visit. After all, the FTF I got on this one will go down as the most memorable of all my finds for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the reward I got for that find which turned into one of my favorite TB’s, the Seldom Seeker.

All waypoints intact. I second-guessed myself on the final and it took a third pass to discover the container, even though I knew it had to be there. Everything is in decent shape. Dropped a lonely Jeep for incentive.
“

[seldom|seen]

Briefly (I know – not). Much of what often gets to me, despite knowing it is mostly unintentional, has to do with a level of appreciation for the effort and time invested. There are plenty of caches out there that don’t deserve much more that TFTC and consequentially the CP logs are expected. There are plenty of others like Skeleton Keys however, where the complexity of the set-up warrants some recognition of the owners efforts and creativity. It’s a huge spectrum to cover – four letters all the way to full thesis papers.

As expressed previously, the length and depth of logs usually reflect the DT rating. More effort and adventure results in more storyline to re-tell. I think when it gets sensitive, at least for me, is when the disparity between the DT and the log lengths is out of whack. I’m sure everyone would agree that a “TFTC” log on Skeleton Keys would be poor taste and outright bad manners (unless you were messing with the owners). This is probably why I get worked up when cachers don’t go the distance on puzzle caches – the time invested to make the solve is reflected in the CP logs and you know right off the bat with a CP log cachers missed out on the whole reason the cache was placed to begin with.

Now, some puzzle creators make puzzles with no greater intent than to simply make some headbanging cryptic puzzle to place between the cacher and the log sheet. But others create puzzles where the whole point is the puzzle not the final cache. If a puzzle creator invests 20-some hours into crafting a unique and difficult puzzle, he/she is simply going to be expecting a bit more storytelling about the adventure than a drive-by CP TFTC log because a few cachers decided to find difficult puzzle finals they didn’t solve.

But, as also expressed above, it’s anybody and everybody’s game and you can’t account for bad taste or poor judgment. Thankfully for every TFTC log there’s usually a well crafted, insightful and appreciative log to balance it. In fact, the expressive logs by a few close allies, like gotta_run and huffinpuffin, carry enough sentiment to buffer dozens of CP logs. These cachers, who give back back in the form of expressive logs, know what it means to the owners and we all thank them for it!

[seldom|seen]

Ah, the perverse pleasure of slowly pealing away a thick scab to get the blood flowing again… it tickles.

Another successful Meet & Greet in the Valley this past weekend and from what I hear, another successful puzzle solve ideas share. I was pleasantly surprised, however, to discover that not many people went out to do puzzles over the weekend, with one group exception and I was told that that group kept everything close to their chest at the event and for that I thank them.
Either the clues have all been shared or Marc has finally convinced everyone that I don’t want people to find my caches, so why bother? Boy, do I hope that’s the case…

I do understand the desire to cache with friends and if you’re going to travel half-way across the state to a meet and greet, why wouldn’t you go with a bunch of your caching buddies? And well you should. But what I MAY NEVER GET A SATISFACTORY ANSWER for is why puzzle caches, that significant portions of these puzzle groups don’t solve, have to be part of that experience? Are there seriously not enough traditionals left for these number chasers to get in the Valley? Why not spend the day looking for traditionals and multi’s if your primary objective is to go caching with friends, not invest the time in front of a monitor screen?

Well OK, here’s a partial answer. The tour leader told me point blank that he enjoyed the challenge of my puzzles and that he was conflicted by liking that challenging aspect of caching but is also not one to go caching solo, especially far from home. I guess there is no easy solution to squaring these two elements and it will always be up to the individual to decide which is more important, following the wishes of the cache owner and geocaching.com’s expectation that cache finders solve the puzzle first, or following the desire to bring your cache buddies along to puzzle finals they played little to no part in solving. (yes, I know some members of the aforementioned tour contributed).

And, this cut both ways. I know, as I too have short-cut finds, though I reserve my own self-proclaimed right to short-cut each and every Marc cache I can find! But, at least I recognize that short-cutting hurts, not just the owner, but everyone who puts 6-12+ hours into solving a cache like Camelback Cinema | Espagueti Occidentales or doing the complicated gyrations to get to a solve on Tributary | Triangle of LOVE, JOY! only to have others log those same caches as a tour or because they stumbled upon it by accident and then shared the location. (BTW, you should actually sign the log book if you’re going to claim a find on a cache that is not frozen in).

Finally, since I also recognize that preaching to the choir won’t get me anywhere for those who can’t hear outside the congregation and will continue to follow their own desires, about the best I can do is lead by example. That is why I will be removing all of my finds for any cache that I did not significantly assist in solving, or outright solve (again with Marc’s caches being the exception). I do not want to be called a Judas Priest, with one exception, Marc, you can call me anything you like!

Judas Priest

1. (euphemism) A less vulgar term in place of the idiom Jesus Christ! commonly used in anger or surprise.

[seldom|seen]

@-cheeto- wrote:

@seldom|seen wrote:

I do use it, but because I don’t really cache anymore and never pull PQ’s it doesn’t really matter. In fact, I don’t have any alerts set up for new caches and the only automated function I use, and just recently turned on to, is the archive alert.

I do have one of my all time favorite caches in there though. A cache I have been to 5 times and have yet to log, and probably never will. I sure do like visiting it though 😉

I know which one it is. Why not log it?

It’s been logged, the LCG points were too good to pass up… Although, it is still in my Ignore list 😉

[seldom|seen]

@kc9gbo wrote:

I may not have a ton of hides, but my goal is quality not quantity and every cache I place I try to make it so that at the end of the day you remember it when you log it.

Here here! And I’d add to mine that at the end of the year, when someone brings up an S|S cache in conversation, you remember it still.

Forcing myself to slow WAY down for a time and have gone to the extreme of shutting dozens down over winter, just so I didn’t have to deal with broken or exposed containers. I try to let everyone know that they absolutely DO NOT need to free my caches from ice to get credit for the find. If you can put your hands on an S|S cache, that’s good enough for me. I wince every time I have to read “cache was frozen in place, but we managed to chip it out” ouch! We live in Wisconsin and hide objects on the ground, what do you think is gonna happen?

Still a ton of stuff on my needs maintenance list and I have got to give myself a little time, that’s the hard part. Much easier to sit here and waste a half hour in the forums than it is to re-build a combination lock cache that needs new WP locations (in this crappy weather), a new puzzle and a relocated final…

[seldom|seen]

A few words of gratitude to a few groups of individuals involved.

First: To amita17 for the very well defined and enlightening list of hurdles that would need to be overcome. While I never had my doubts, it was iffy from the start, so much so that a whole other series of preserve locations were being scouted for “Plan B”. Amita’s early insight helped me frame the intent of the series in a way that the decision-makers at the Y could understand.

Second: To naturboy12 for letting me voice the idea and doing a fantastic job of championing the cause by successfully presenting the series idea on 2 separate occasions to 2 separate decision-making bodies at the new Y. All the credit goes to Shane for getting the idea approved, allowing the rest of us to move forward.

Third: To everyone who agree to be involved in the creation of the series, no matter how small the role. I was understandably apprehensive about naming the series “Zeroes to Heroes”, an allusion to the fact the half of the participants had never published a cache before, but as I moved forward I just couldn’t come up with a more fitting series title. Everyone was patient with me as I not only struggled through the permission process, but also as I directed the “look” of the caches for consistency, despite having said early on that I would stay out of it and be hands-off. The veterans probably knew better anyway!

As those who know me know, the reward in chasing a series like this in not necessarily the location – although I admit I was pleasantly surprised when I finally took the time to walk the preserve – but in the education you get out of it and the interests that are sparked from solving the puzzles. Because of this series I dug out my Sand County Almanac and re-read the seasons portion, found a number of great new websites and learned a ton about the Antiquities Act that I never new before. Suffice it to say, solve the series and you will come away with more than a few memories and you’ll learn a thing or two in the process.

Again, thanks to everyone who participated in the process. I too think it is a great success. How do I know? For one, Rob Horwich, who just turned 70 a week ago and is not by any means a computer savvy individual, has downloaded the series header graphic from his listing and has it on his desktop!

[seldom|seen]

I promised myself I wasn’t going to miss one of your big ones to place a special ammo can, but alas things got hectic with a certain cache series that distracted me from getting a number of tribute caches out on time. Guess I get to wait until 2011 now…

Well done, and keep up the moderate pace, my mentor and we’ll be seeing you soon in a classroom or on the trails.

[seldom|seen]

Congrats guys and sorry I didn’t get your tribute together before you hit that mark. It was placed and the puzzle all set but I learned that somehow another cacher snagged the spot even though I’d pre-entered the listing and should have had is reserved for the past couple months. Pretty bummed by that and dealing with the Zeroes series left me with little time to find a new home for the final.

So I missed your 6K, missed Giz’s 3K and am sure to be missing a few more in the next few weeks as I try to catch up on my own stuff. I’ll just have to keep an eye on you guys as you get to the next big one.

[seldom|seen]

Works for me too. Plugged in my master S|S file and wow, that’s some serious saturation!!!!! I will likely use this for new caches where I know proximity is an issue (that’s about 99.99% of the time). Nicely done!

[seldom|seen]

Dang, all these milestone 1K caches and my catch-all Silver tibute cache for these new club members is still in my truck. Gotta get it out soon, like tomorrow!!! Congratulations!

[Author]

Posts