MnGCA Home MnGCA
Minnesota Geocaching Association
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   User listUser list   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

More changes to geocaching.com
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MnGCA Forum Index -> Geocaching Websites
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
King Boreas
Geocacher


Joined: 16 Dec 2002

Posts: 2443

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 7:18 am    Post subject: More changes to geocaching.com Reply with quote

Quote:
We have been told not to list any new caches that
REQUIRE you to place a new cache in order to claim a find. Also, we
were told not to list new challenge type caches that allow the
finders to hide a new cache in lieu of finding one to satisfy the
requirements.


If this is previously noted, discussed, analyzed I apologize.
_________________
Joined: 16 Dec 2002

arrive...raise heck...leave (SCSA)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 7:51 am    Post subject: Re: More changes to geocaching.com Reply with quote

King Boreas wrote:
Quote:
We have been told not to list any new caches that
REQUIRE you to place a new cache in order to claim a find. Also, we
were told not to list new challenge type caches that allow the
finders to hide a new cache in lieu of finding one to satisfy the
requirements.


If this is previously noted, discussed, analyzed I apologize.

I heard about that but I haven't seen it discussed anywhere. Thanks!
_________________
Sad state of affairs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pfalstad
Geocacher


Joined: 02 Feb 2006

Posts: 1015

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 10:16 am    Post subject: Re: More changes to geocaching.com Reply with quote

Quote:
We have been told not to list any new caches that
REQUIRE you to place a new cache in order to claim a find.

Yay! Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bflentje
Geocacher


Joined: 29 May 2006

Posts: 4067

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess that means Cache Factory v2.0 for this spring gets abandoned. Oh well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
King Boreas
Geocacher


Joined: 16 Dec 2002

Posts: 2443

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 4:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yay!


Boo!

I'm shelving three upgraded versions of Jukebox Hero.

Several hours involved already. Easier and faster to just answer the calls for more skirtlifters. Hate 'em, but I'll get over it.

I really would like to hear the logic behind it.
_________________
Joined: 16 Dec 2002

arrive...raise heck...leave (SCSA)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Kitch
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 18 May 2003

Posts: 1286

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wonder if they would approve a cache where you are required to become an paying Geocaching.com member....oh wait ...nevermind..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
zuma!
Geocacher


Joined: 10 Aug 2007

Posts: 48

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

King Boreas wrote:
Quote:
Yay!


Boo!

I'm shelving three upgraded versions of Jukebox Hero.

Several hours involved already. Easier and faster to just answer the calls for more skirtlifters. Hate 'em, but I'll get over it.

I really would like to hear the logic behind it.


Hi KB,

Yeah, I was surprized by this new rule as well. I would guess the rationale behind it is that many seed caches lead to a lot of film cans put into poorly thought out places, thus decreasing overall cache quality.

Seed caches dont HAVE to lead to a lot of poor caches, but sadly, they often times do.

zuma
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paklid
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 09 May 2004

Posts: 656

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm conflicted on this topic.

On the one hand,
during the short history of caching, innovation has been encouraged to expand the game and bring new and interesting twists into it.

I jumped at the opportunity to do the first "seed" cache I saw (an arcticabn cache). I did a second one that was very near my home. I'm not sure I would do any others unless they were VERY close to home. I like the innovative side of it but I'm not necessarily looking to hide an individual cache at the behest of somebody else anymore.

Another example of innovation is the Gustobob series where he had a series of five caches, one at posted to get you to an area. That cache had coords for three nearby caches - each of which had a piece of the coords for a final cache. It was essentially a multi with legally loggable stages (five finds for your effort).

I like to see innovation in the game. I don't really appreciate efforts by Groundspeak to pull away from that value.

However, on the other hand,
I can definitely see a problem with cache owners who see fit to have you jump through a bunch more hoops than finding the cache and logging in the logbook before you can post a find. I won't even bother looking for them if I read the page well enough to see that weird logging requirements exist. I once drove a decent distance (relative to what I usually would do) to go after a new series of about a dozen caches. I found all but one. Still, with the info I had, I was able to figure out the general vicinity of the final "puzzle". So I visited the area and with luck and, well.. probably just luck... I did find that final. I logged a find on it, only to have it removed by the owner for my DNFing one of the caches in the series. The DNFed cache was a pretty hard one to find from witnessing the logs since most everyone either had the owner on the phone or in person to talk them through the find. I had no such advantage and got robbed of a find. Anyway, it was highly irritating to have a find removed.

Having what I consider to be a legitimate find deleted (legitimate find defined as: I read or determined the coords, ventured forth, found the container, logged my find in the logbook) is very annoying to me. If Groundspeak's actions are to put a lid on this, I'm probably a fan - though it bothers me that with more boundaries we might have less innovation.

Of course, as far as I can recall, I've never deleted anybody's log in more than three years of hiding caches. As far as I've gone is to email someone saying they might have given away too much info in their log. I even let multiple finds of the same cache stand - because I really don't care if someone else's stats are a little messed up.
_________________
-Paklid
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
spinowner
Geocacher


Joined: 25 Nov 2004

Posts: 589

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think if you access the container by whatever means and you log your visit you deserve a find. Period. I've found several puzzle/multis without visiting all the preliminary stages, and one of my puzzles was found by a cacher looking for a place to hide a cache. No deletions in any of those cases. I agree with the new directive that bans the requirement to hide another cache in order to log a find.
_________________
Sig line? I don't need no stinking sig line!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

spinowner wrote:
I think if you access the container by whatever means and you log your visit you deserve a find. Period. I've found several puzzle/multis without visiting all the preliminary stages, and one of my puzzles was found by a cacher looking for a place to hide a cache. No deletions in any of those cases.

Minnesota found one of my early caches w/o a GPS and solely by wandering around the park until he found what my unnecessarily good hints told him to look for. I certainly didn't delete that log and if anything, he deserved the find more than anyone who just projected a waypoint Smile

In the end, I'm fine with the Groundspeak ruling. While I have participated in seed caches (Arcticabn's Nursery), I have found some of the fallout from other seed caches (including my own hide from Nursery) to be fairly annoying and I know that it caused quite a stir with Dakota County park staff when they suddenly saw a steep rise in the number of caches going into their parks.

It's yet another innovation in caches that has gone the way of the traveling cache.
_________________
Sad state of affairs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bflentje
Geocacher


Joined: 29 May 2006

Posts: 4067

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Marsha and Silent Bob wrote:
spinowner wrote:
I think if you access the container by whatever means and you log your visit you deserve a find. Period. I've found several puzzle/multis without visiting all the preliminary stages, and one of my puzzles was found by a cacher looking for a place to hide a cache. No deletions in any of those cases.

Minnesota found one of my early caches w/o a GPS and solely by wandering around the park until he found what my unnecessarily good hints told him to look for. I certainly didn't delete that log and if anything, he deserved the find more than anyone who just projected a waypoint Smile

In the end, I'm fine with the Groundspeak ruling. While I have participated in seed caches (Arcticabn's Nursery), I have found some of the fallout from other seed caches (including my own hide from Nursery) to be fairly annoying and I know that it caused quite a stir with Dakota County park staff when they suddenly saw a steep rise in the number of caches going into their parks.

It's yet another innovation in caches that has gone the way of the traveling cache.

_________________
MnGCA Bylaws: Article IX - Non-Discrimination Clause.



I feel as the former owner of a seed cache myself that I am being discriminated against. Wink Rolling Eyes Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bflentje
Geocacher


Joined: 29 May 2006

Posts: 4067

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just kidding. I am sad to see the possible ruling about it but I will sure abide by it (not that I've have a choice).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jambro
Geocacher


Joined: 02 Nov 2004

Posts: 576

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:48 pm    Post subject: Re: More changes to geocaching.com Reply with quote

King Boreas wrote:
Quote:
We have been told not to list any new caches that
REQUIRE you to place a new cache in order to claim a find. Also, we
were told not to list new challenge type caches that allow the
finders to hide a new cache in lieu of finding one to satisfy the
requirements.


If this is previously noted, discussed, analyzed I apologize.


KB - just curious, where was this quoted from? The gc.com forum? Their rules?
_________________
I feel the need! The need for speed!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bad_CRC
Geocacher


Joined: 02 Oct 2006

Posts: 214

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:40 pm    Post subject: Re: More changes to geocaching.com Reply with quote

pfalstad wrote:
Quote:
We have been told not to list any new caches that
REQUIRE you to place a new cache in order to claim a find.

Yay! Very Happy


yay! Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
emmanogoldfish
Geocacher


Joined: 26 Oct 2007

Posts: 106

PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Marsha and Silent Bob wrote:
spinowner wrote:
I think if you access the container by whatever means and you log your visit you deserve a find. Period. I've found several puzzle/multis without visiting all the preliminary stages, and one of my puzzles was found by a cacher looking for a place to hide a cache. No deletions in any of those cases.

Minnesota found one of my early caches w/o a GPS and solely by wandering around the park until he found what my unnecessarily good hints told him to look for. I certainly didn't delete that log and if anything, he deserved the find more than anyone who just projected a waypoint Smile


To the best of my knowledge GroundSpeak Inc. does not have a rule that you are required to use a GPS to participate. A cache lister could create a Mystery Cache and with special logging requirements that state a GPS is required to log this cache and in what manner the GPS needs to be utilized.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MnGCA Forum Index -> Geocaching Websites All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Geocaching Cache Icons, Copyright 2009, Groundspeak Inc. All rights reserved. Used with Permission.