[GeoStL] Re: Heart of America 2006 Championships

  • From: Glenn <Glenn@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, <geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 08:26:05 -0500

-
I have indirectly (and directly) taken about a ton of heat over things like this.


In particular, the LoTec pages and allowing the logging of temp caches as a separate log at all. Recently a cacher from Iowa wanted to set up a lotec page, it was beat up so badly that I almost hesitated mentioning where he got the idea from. Everyone (other reviewers) thought logging separate temp caches on a lotec page was a bad idea but everyone stopped short of saying ban the idea. Many reviewers called it a "bogus numbers run" and that was just the *nice* stuff. I argued that even if the temp caches were logged on the event page, it would still count "in the numbers". I do not know if the Iowa event folks got their LoTec page or not. Given the nearly 100% opposition to it, I would think not. I should check to see if the guy there went and did it anyway.

I personally think that logging each punch of a course if gigantically bogus and is just a bogus numbers run. It would be akin to logging each step of a mulitcache which i don't care for either. BUT, an event organizer can organize things any which way they want since it is their show. I DO think that IF each stop in the course is gonna be loggable then it should comply to the basic set of cache placing guidelines just like any other cache. Distance, logbook and all that basic stuff. Should the cache reviewer get involved with all that? NO, i would not even want to but the events organizers should police themselves and make sure that each loggable caches is as valid as it can be. It would be very easy for the whole event cache thing to boil down to a cheap easy "come to the picnic punch your card 100 times" and go home to log your "finds".

Even with the relaxation of the event guidelines, events are tough to deal with. Woodstock has about 6 event pages for 6 events in town on the same weekend. They are getting beat up badly and will end up archiving all but one of the events with the thought of "its one event on one weekend, it should have only one event page. I looked at them and each event is a different event, different time with a different purpose at different places in town. Some are even on different days. One event (woodstock) .... one cache page. confusion abounds.

Sometime we should have a discussion on what an "event" is, and what makes an event, what ya have to do to be an event. ect. The guidelines are very clearly unclear and a gigantic problem in my opinion.

At 07:21 AM 5/10/2005, Mike Griffin wrote:

I just read the info for the KC event in April of 2006 and it looks good with one exception. I don't think that punches should be logged on GC.Com. I know this is just my opinion but here is the reason behind it. I could easily throw an event and place 100 punches in a few trees. Then advertise that there will be 200+ loggable caches, when they are really just a punch in a tree. This goes against what is a cache.. GC.Com defines it as "It must have a log."

I don't think the event is going to be anywhere close to this and I think it will be a great event. I might even attend.. However, I personally, would not log a punch. I just feel that some people will abuse this and have events to boost numbers so they can draw more people.

I know that this was a sore subject with the KC folks that came to MOGA. They complained that each punch couldn't be loggable. I also know that there are those who will say their punch card is the log, what's the diff? Don't know if there really is a difference with the exception that the log is not IN the cache. There are those who will argue that someone could do the same thing with caches.. However, cache rules should apply such as .1 mile in between caches. The same should go for punches.

If I set out 100 caches, they would have to be .1 from each other. A great example of this was the 45 caches for the "Secrets of Stonehaven" event. They were done extremely well. You had to find the first to get the coords for the next 5, they would then lead you to the next 10 and so on. No matter how you did them, each one was at least 550 ft from the next. Very well done.

I guess it boils down to policing the events to make sure caching rules apply. I would hate to see events degraded to the point where we scatter 100's of punches or caches and then advertise, come and find 150 caches in one day!

Mike

---------------- Glenn, Missouri Geocachers Assoc http://www.MoGeo.com *THE* Forums for Mo & Ks. http://mogeo.ipbhost.com/index.php?

Dave's Handy Hiding Hints http://www.ratisher.com/geocache_hiding.htm
 MOGA 2005 Winners ...  Check it out!  http://moga.geostl.com

****************************************
Our WebPage! Http://WWW.GeoStL.com Mail List Info. //www.freelists.org/list/geocaching
Mail List FAQ's: //www.freelists.org/help/questions.html ****************************************
To unsubscribe from this list:
send an email to geocaching-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field





Other related posts: