[Az-Geocaching] "Finding" caches

[Trisha Radley]

Nice....um...report, Bob...  <<grin>>

~~trisha ~~ "Ligntning"
"Experienced" Geo-cacher (ha ha)


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Renner" <brenner@axsysautomation.com>
To: <az-geocaching@listserv.snaptek.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 9:17 AM
Subject: [Az-Geocaching] "Finding" caches


> To find or not to find, that is the question.
> 
> There are a few circumstances where you could log your own
> cache as a find or where you could find a cache more than
> once.  When a cache is moved (yours or anothers) and you 
> have to re-find it, it's a find.  I took some friends to 
> a cache I had previously found.  The container was moved 
> to a completely different spot about 70 feet away and in 
> a small hole in the rocks.  We had to re-find this cache.  
> I logged it as a find.  At the time I thought it would not 
> change my find number.  I thought the number was the number 
> of caches with a find log, not the number of find logs 
> themselves.  However, it was still a find.  Also, the Beat 
> the Heat Happy Hour cache was a joint cache by CBX2 and 
> myself.  They set up the location and gave me the 
> coordinates and I entered the cache page.  I logged that 
> as a find because that was the first time I was there and 
> had to "find" the resturant.
> 
> My opinion is that the log itself should reflect what 
> happened.  If you found the cache, then log it as a find.  
> Perhaps Jeremy should change the way the find number is 
> generated to only count the caches with finds and not the 
> find logs.  However, this would complicate the situation 
> where there is a moving cache which does have to be 
> re-found whenever it's moved.
> 
> It all boils down to what you're looking at.  If you're 
> looking at the logs themselves for the insight to what
> the hunter was thinking when he visited the cache, then the
> type of log should reflect what happened.  If you're just 
> looking at the numbers and not reading all of the logs, 
> then the numbers need to be modified to only count the 
> caches and not the logs.  If geocaching.com didn't report
> the find number, this topic wouldn't even exist.  ALL finds 
> (your own or a re-find) would be logged as finds.
> 
> I tend to put a little more information into what I did 
> and saw during the hike or drive, and what I thought about 
> the location.  I also try to read all the logs of all the 
> caches in Arizona.  It helps me decide which caches I want 
> to visit next.  
> 
> I don't care that much about my numbers.  Sure it was nice 
> to be number one.  But it just showed, to me at least, that 
> geocaching was something that I enjoyed.  It was a way to 
> show me new places I hadn't been to before. I enjoyed the 
> challenge of finding something that someone left for me to 
> find and in a location they thought was interesting.
> 
> The numbers should only reflect the interest a person has
> in geocaching and should not be scrutinized for the exact
> value of that number.  Someone with 1-5 finds is a neocacher 
> and is just getting started.  Someone with 15-20 finds is an 
> experienced cacher and obviously knows how to hunt.  Someone
> with 50+ finds is a seasoned cacher who has passed the
> novelty stage and definately enjoys the sport.  Someone with
> 100+ finds within a few months can't control himself and his
> wife probably thinks he's obsessed ;)  But he's probably having
> a great time.
> 
> As far as the stats pages on Snaptek's web page - keep them
> there.  Some people enjoy seeing them and they will find some
> way to calculate them.  However, I don't think we need to argue
> over what is and what isn't a find.  If someone wants to 
> inflate their numbers, there are numerous ways this can be 
> done other than the two mentioned here.  I'm just trying to 
> express what I did and pass on the information to the next
> person looking for the cache.
> 
> Bob Renner
> Seasoned geocacher
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Az-Geocaching mailing list
> Az-Geocaching@listserv.snaptek.com
> http://listserv.snaptek.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
>