[seldom|seen]

@JimandLinda wrote:

I was warned about a few of the “antics” of the Lonely Players and was prepared ahead of time what to watch for. The actions of a few stayed true to form.

After this 1 month of participating, I have 2 questions:

1) What is to prevent me from visiting a cache on the 19th of the month, logging it on geocaching.com website as visiting it on the 24th, and submitting my LCG report on the 31st? Who is PHYSICALLY verifying the hard copy of the cache log?

Nothing prevents you from doing this but your own caching ethic. It’s a bit like claiming a year long one-a-day streak with the knowledge that there were a couple instances where you fudged it. No else else might ever find out, but you have to live with the guilt that your win for the month was not bone fide. To be clear. All of the caches I logged were found specifically on those dates. Don’t believe me? Go look for yourself. I also logged the caches within the specified logging timeframe and did not break any rules there. Did I intentionally hold off on logging them? You bet. Kept you guessing till the end, didn’t it? So, if you consider that “antics”, so be it, but don’t liken it to holding an ace up my sleeve which is cheating.

@JimandLinda wrote:

2) What is to prevent me from driving to a 5 star terrain cache, previewing the terrain, deciding NOT to go any farther, and getting 6 points by logging it as a DNF?

Same as above. There were some instances early on this year that called into question the validity of some DNF and Revisit logs of multiple players. To stay above the fray I decided to ignore revisits altogether for a few months and keep my DNF logs to a minimum by logging only those where I was either given permission to replace an MIA cache or spent at least a half hour looking for it, and that half hour included driving time and trail walking time. I admit that I’ve logged a number of DNFs this past year where I never actually made it to ground zero, but are you seriously going to begrudge me 3-4 points for 15-30 minutes of tackling often 3-4 terrains, sometimes with kids in tow (like Pretty Ones Pretty View), after a 20 minute drive to get there? I believe I have earned all the points I claimed especially when you consider that likely 80% of them were found at night between full days of other activities not caching related. We are all aware of the additional challenges night caching poses.

Even more to the point. There were 2 months this year where I intentionally orchestrated a tie. It would have been easy for me to log one or two more caches and have clear wins for 3 months, but I didn’t. I logged as many as I could to try to keep up with the game leader, but not take away the hard earned wins by others. This last month was an exception where the vast number of your early “Replacements” set in motion a personal challenge to see if I could catch up to you – regardless of all those extra points. I tied a couple months specifically NOT to dissuade those players from playing the game in the future. Sure, I could have done the opposite and stayed just a point or two behind them as well, but the ties were fun to post 🙂

@JimandLinda wrote:

I realize that the LCG is a bit like golf… we call our own penalties and score our own cards. There is a limit to what the reviewer can verify, other than the report that has been submitted. I definitely appreciate the hard work and time it takes to verify the submissions, but nickel and diming a lonely cache, just to “win”, will discourage more participants, not promote them.

These are only my opinions from geochatter and 1 month of the LCG. As a result of playing the game, I have really enjoyed the new cache sites that the game has brought me to!

I hope you don’t feel like I nickle and dimmed you guys this month for the win. I was only able to score a few replacements compared to how many did you have? A dozen… You know how hard you worked to get where you did. Now image yourself doing most of those caches between the hours of midnight and 6am and you will know how hard I did.

[seldom|seen]

@Team Deejay wrote:

I guess I can understand the collector mentality that goes along with “numbers” caching. It just doesn’t fit my personality. I’m more of a “here and now” person. It is all about the beauty of the location, the challenge of the terrain, and even the hide itself. The only things I’m interested in collecting are the experiences. So, a DNF is not necessarily a disappointment to me. If the process of finding the cache was enjoyable, then I have had a net gain from the process. I will say that guardrail hides and lamppost hides tend to be more aggravating when they are missing, mostly because there is nothing redeeming about the hide besides getting a number. On the other hand, getting a DNF in the Kettle Moraine just means I get another chance to go there and try again in a beautiful place with challenging hiking.

Agreed. They are all fair game in my book and I actually enjoy the puzzles, multi’s and offsets more than the traditionals in most cases. But then, I don’t do much actual caching anymore unless they are Lonely. I drive right past hundreds of caches that are easy to get in order to make my way to a difficult lonely that may take 2 hours to complete. I am certain that I am missing some great caches along the way and that is why I wish there were some way to rate caches (a very long-winded thread some time ago) so I could make a point of stopping to get those that I might enjoy. I simply have no interest in spending half an hour looking for a hanging 35mm in a pine tree in another city park! Blaahh. At the same time, I will be absolutely thrilled when I find a cache that hasn’t been found in a year because I had to walk through a marsh to get it. I guess that means I am not a numbers guy. The difficult part is taking the time to research all of the caches and read through the logs as everyone will agree.

A great location is well worth the time no matter what the cache type. Hikes are OK because I get some exercise, but I have a unique situation that predicates my caching solo at night without family, so the hikes don’t do them any good. I hope to change that someday as I completely agree with the sentiment about getting the family out on a hike and caching at the same time.

I think we could use a couple more cache attributes at the very least. One that incorporates some well defined quality or location icons like a Tombstone for WSQ caches, a summit for vista views, a Book for Historical or educational caches, to suggest just a couple. Anything that tells me what my potential reward for making the effort without having to go through all the logs which can also be misleading. I might have to dig that thread up again…

[seldom|seen]

@-cheeto- wrote:

Tie “winners” to the period rather than monthly. (for instance, Nov/Dec).

This might make the game less appealing for participants if there are half as many “periods” to pull out a win and would drive the hard players to try even harder to rack up high points. I think it’s better to leave the current schedule in place.

@-cheeto- wrote:

Perhaps give out WGA coins, apparel, “free” campout entry, etc. as prizes? Continue to try to spread the word about the WGA…

Great idea.

@-cheeto- wrote:

To simplify scoring: Get rid of all maintenance points. (as is mentioned, this should be done regardless and we should stop encouraging the replacement of containers without owner consent as has been discussed in another thread) Get rid of “revisit” points, which in my opinion are lame.

I do think revisits are worthwhile, as was mentioned before, since the re-visitor knows exactly where they found it before.

@-cheeto- wrote:

Should a player be able to get points for a DNF and find on the same cache in the same period? Multiple dnf’s? Something to think about.

I think this is OK as well. We put in a lot of effort into finding some of these tough ones and there is some value in at least logging a DNF to let the owner know the hide is suspect.

@-cheeto- wrote:

Somehow increase value of performing a cache rescue and finding those year + lonely caches.

Marc’s comment about limiting the number of missions seems a little constricting. There haven’t been all that many missions logged in the game (a dozen maybe) and they are spread out pretty evenly across the state. Not much chance that someone is going to abuse them for the sake of the game. Whatever we can do to encourage the Mission system to get more users in general to submit missions on problems caches will help and better incorporating in into the LCG will help.

@gotta_run wrote:

New scoring rule: Any cache that has received only DNFs while on the LCG list (i.e., no owner feedback), and is subsequently rehabbed or replaced by a player, said LCG player shall have 500 points deducted from his or her total.

Again, this is probably the biggest topic that we need to collectively hammer out. Many of the lonely caches that fall into this category are there because the owner has left the game or become inactive and those caches should get archived through the normal channels of inactivity. On the other hand there are some that the owners just can’t get to in a timely fashion and they appreciate the replacements.

I think we need to get some kind of owner confirmation that owners are active in the sport and are willing to have their cache in the LCG. 75% of the caches I have replaced were done with the owners permission, the other 25% were questionable and could have used better judgement, especially early in the game. I do this this is a valuable aspect of the game but by the same token needs some kind of constraint imposed to we don’t end up with the same lonely caches next year.

[seldom|seen]

@Team Deejay wrote:

As we are in the last month of the year, it seems like a good time to review the Lonely Cache Game and decide if we need to make any changes to the program. So far we have had around 66 participants, which is good, and around 10 crazed individuals who make it their life’s work to “win”, which is not so good. While I am very happy that a lot of these caches are getting found (or not found), I’m thinking we need to do something to encourage more participation in areas outside of the Fox Cities/Green Bay area. I don’t have any really great ideas, but I do have a few thoughts to start the conversation.

Thanks for starting the conversation now. I thought that we’d dicsuss this at the Only the Lonely Event, but then next year’s game will already have started, so it makes sense to talk through some of this stuff now.

I’m not sure I agree with the statement about the 10 crazed players of which I am one, and I’ll get into the why’s further on…

@Team Deejay wrote:

1. I’m a little disappointed that many of the “very lonely” (longer than 1 year unfound) caches continue to be ignored. Maybe we need more incentive for these.

I don’t there’s anything that you will be able to do to further encourage players to get these. The serious player are going for the really tough ones as it is and the double point incentive is certainly a good reward for the effort some of them require. Also, I would couch the comment about the serious players by saying that many of these very lonely caches would not have been found if not for the game and for the top ten contenders. I think getting the word out is different than trying to confine regions to regional players. There have been months when a player in LaCrosse or EauClaire could have cleaned the board if they cared to, but the interest wasn’t there and it wasn’t because the Valley players were playing hard either.

I think if you emphasize the yearly totals and the top 10 or top 20 players getting some kind of reward or recognition that might go farther than the monthly winner bragging rights and rewards in sparking more interest in the game.

@Team Deejay wrote:

2. I’m not sure that the “prizes” motivate anyone.

Agreed, while nice, I certainly am not playing hard to win the prize. I like the idea of handing out awards at the end of the year which is why I am going to be doing that for the top 10 at the Event.

@Team Deejay wrote:

3. If we are going to continue with prizes, I would like to have a volunteer to coordinate prize acquisition and distribution. Apparently I am not real good at coordinating this sort of thing.

See previous comment….

@Team Deejay wrote:

4. I’m thinking we need to “better” incorporate the Cache Rescue program.

Agreed. There caches should be part of the list and there should be a new checkbox for “performed rescue mission – 4 points”

@Team Deejay wrote:

5. I’m also thinking that the scoring is a bit too complicated, but I am reluctant to change this and make more work for Jeremy. (This is what I get for copying stuff from Indiana!)

I don’t know that the scoring is that complicated. I think that I agree with T&B that we should just get rid of the maintenance points and simply expect that anyone in the lonely game should make it a point to do what they can to doctor up caches.

There’s a big one here that we need to talk through and that is the replacements of MIA caches, of which there have been many. Sometimes the replacements are much appreciated and pre-approved, sometimes the opposite is true. I think in the future there needs to be some kind of verification widget that sends the owner of a lonely cache an e-mail requesting permission for entry into the LCG and permission for any player to replace and MIA cache. Not sure how it would work, but if those suspect caches were green-lighted for replacement prior to hunting that would make it a lot easier on us all.

@Team Deejay wrote:

So, chime in, post your thoughts, challenge each other, and I will sit back and take it all in. Just be aware that this is a sort of “brainstorming” thread, so not everything mentioned will be implemented. The goal is to make the game more fun for all participants.

I have more thoughts to come…

[seldom|seen]

I’ve always thought about placing a Pythonian cache like this with a short video recording device and the cache requirement being: Sit at the piano and record the saying, “And now for something completely different”! That would make for a great cache.

[seldom|seen]

No takers and no logs on any flags caches yesterday. That’s a little disappointing. Guess I better give you all a little more lead time.

Well, since Gizfinder found 2 Flags caches the day prior, the Prize goes to him. Congrats Giz, remind me to pass it off to you the next time we cross paths.

[seldom|seen]

@Sagasu wrote:

Another tie?! I can’t add well enough to orchestrate that. Congrats to both of you!

All purely coincendental 😉 November on the other hand, is shaping up to be quite a challenge…

[seldom|seen]

Not really a goal-oriented cacher and certainly don’t follow the numbers in the “find” side of the equation. In fact, I usually make light of my milestones and pick caches that have little to no meaning for me.

On the “hide” side of the equation, I did have a goal to place 2 a week for my first year which I came pretty close to accomplishing. I then switched gears and my goal became to place 100 puzzles before my 2 year anniversary which I succeeded in doing as well. Those are the only “2” goals I can think of.

When it comes to the Lonely Cache Game, I never set out to be a major contender nor did I have the goal of coming in first or second place. That ranking was more a function of playing off of Sagasu’s veracious approach and keeping that fun rivalry going throughout the year.

Right now, while I’m on a 3-month hiatus (with an occasional LCG run), my only goal is to keep my many caches active and keep Dave guessing about his first place lead in the LCG.

[seldom|seen]

I hope it doesn’t get any lower. The pain we are all going to feel when the price doubles again is going to be twice as hard to take as it was the first time around.

I certainly enjoy filling the tank for under $40 again, don’t get me wrong. But it is going to go back up as the economy slowly recovers and I was just getting used to paying $3-$4 a gallon.

At least it eases the stress of managing all the other fee increases we pay. Just got my license renewal notice for $75. Wasn’t that long ago that it was $25.

[seldom|seen]

@labrat_wr wrote:

BTW: will there be a link to the Google map this time around?

Where is that all important map?

[seldom|seen]

@Trekkin’ and Birdin’ wrote:

Clarify “major participants,” please. Good idea!

First, it will be open to anybody regardless of participation in the LCG or not. I would extend a specific invitation to anybody who participated this year and my point about “major” participants was directed to the top 5-10 players who would have the most to share since we have done the most caches.

In other words, I would make an effort to schedule the event to fit into the schedules of the top tier of players, but obviously I can’t make it work for everyone who played… know what I mean?

[seldom|seen]

Well, I had a little left in me for the month and a nice overnight window on the 31st and 1st in Spring Green after my sister’s Halloween party and I simply couldn’t resist. Of course, me being on hietus and the wife hiding my GPS left me with just the iPhone to cache with. It works well when you have bars, but when you loose phone signal the only thing you can read is your position and not that of the cache. I had a stack of 20 potentials to get and was hoping for at least 10. I only managed 4 finds overnight having DNF’d a few the day before. So I just managed to tie it up for the month and I too was surprised to not see Labrat pull ahead over the weekend which I was anticipating. I guess Pete was winded from walking ankle deep marsh muck….

I am going to host a LCG event in January for all the players of the game to not only re-count all of their lonely cache stories, but also do a little reflection on what we could have and should do differently next year. It will be a Saturday in January and I’d like to know if that works for the major participants in the game before publishing the event. You can PM me and let me know.

[seldom|seen]

@LDove wrote:

I don’t think there is much you can do.

Well, not in the way of pursuing remediation from this character anyway. However, there is one BIG step you and everyone else can take to help prevent vandalism of caches and that is to encourage your fellow cachers to hide their finds as good or better than they find them.

I have found over time that the reason mine go missing, with the exception of mother nature vandalizing them, is poor re-concealment after finds. I try to express this whenever I see one of mine in the open. I tell everyone that I can, “If you see an S|S cache before you are standing on it, it probably wasn’t re-hidden the way it was supposed to be”.

Case in Point (literally). I just found 15 minutes ago that “Misplaced his Flybox” has gone missing. My brother was out fishing 3 weeks ago and decided to check on it and found it in the wrong spot, out in the open, plain as day. He re-hid it. Yesterday he was out again and was curious about whether it was mother nature at play and discovered the cache was missing. It was cabled in place so someone physically removed it. My best guess is a critter was messing with it, it fell from it’s hidey hole and a fisherman spotted it. Now it’s up to me to figure out a solution, but since that spot is jeopardized, I’m not going to put a replacement in play there ad I know it will go missing again.

[seldom|seen]

I’m sure those that have an issue with long cache naming conventions have a lot to say about S|S caches. The vast majority of mine are 2-Part names. The first part giving the cache a category that places it in a certain series or class of hide and the second part being specific to the cache itself. If I employed the suggested acronyms, I’d probably drive myself nuts trying to remember what they all stood for.

The one thing I have going for me is that 100 of the 166 I own are puzzles and very few of them are field solvable, which means you are simply not going to be going to the cache before you have a solve in hand, on paper most likely, and therefore this is a non-issue.

I do understand the frustration some of you must feel with the limits placed on you by the devices you use and apologize it this leads to frustrations when hunting any of my caches. But, I have come to embrace my naming convention and it does help me keep track of my own caches. Anyone with a hundred plus caches knows how difficult it can be to remember what the cache hide is on a specific cache. I don’t know how Marc can keep all of his WSQ caches straight, especially when some of them have the same cemetery name – I guess that’s why he recently amended his list to include the closest town.

It just goes to show you that you cannot please absolutely everyone in this sport and each of us runs into our own limitations with equipment and software depending on what we decide to use.

[seldom|seen]

Thanks for the Kudos!

I was only trying to keep the gap from that absolute maniac in the lead from getting to far away, but every time I get to within 300 he pushes back again. I don’t think he’ll ever trust me when it comes to this game.

I did work pretty hard to get the lead in September, but only because I really wanted that Autism coin to put in my next Pinball Wizard cache as an FTF prize :). Now I have the coin but am taking a few months off and wont get to that cache for some time.

I feel pretty good about bringing home the Silver for 2008 and that’s pretty good considering the other half knows nothing of my competition in the LCG and the fact that I found 80-90 percent of the lonliess in the dark…

Now it’s time to sit back and relax and watch the contentions for Bronze, Copper and Pewter. I do have a stack of GB puzzles solved and if I get a chance, may yet post some decent numbers for October as I have been know to fall off the wagon 😉

[Author]

Posts