[Az-Geocaching] Re:sport/hobby/log books

[Brian Cluff]

On Sunday 01 December 2002 02:23 am, Bill wrote:
> In addition, after the
> newspaper woman interviewed me for the second article, I was told by a
> friend that several on the list were unhappy with me about it because I
> have logged few caches and they didn't think I had any business talking
> about geocaching with the reporter, especially since she described me in
> the article as an "avid" geocacher.  Well, we are avid.  We just don't log.

I don't remember anyone saying anything negative about the people that were 
interviewed for any article, and if it was, it was probably in reference to 
the poor reserch that she was doing about the article, and that she could 
have picked someone with a few more finds to their name (how were we supposed 
to know you don't log)

> We have a great time locating geocaches, but we have no interest in the
> competitive aspects of the sport.  When we first got involved, we logged a
> couple of caches, but then I suscribed to this list and we saw all the
> emphasis on totals, etc.  So, we just quit logging caches.  We didn't quit
> finding them, but we did quit writing in the log books and we did quit
> logging them on the web.

Out of the 155 people on this this, I would only bet that there are 1 or 2 
that the numbers really mean anything to.  I wouldn't let a couple of people 
that leave competetive message give you a sour taste for logging.  Most 
mentions of the numbers are in a congratulatory way to single out acknowledge 
a person/teams accomplishment, and it has never been done in a way that even 
hinted that they were somehow better than anyone else.

> Unfortunately, this has restricted us from another aspect of the activity
> that we know we would enjoy.  We placed a cache very early in our
> geocaching careers, but then, after getting on this list, discovered that
> people think you should not hide caches until after you have found a bunch,
> and should keep some sort of ratio between your finds and your hides. 
> Since we don't log finds, we felt we could not place any more caches.

Don't let your lack of numbers on the website stop you from hiding caches, 
there are plenty of teams that hide more caches than they find (puz-zel comes 
to mind), and that is perfectly fine, we all have our way of doing thing and 
we all get pleasures from different things in life.  I would like to 
encourage you to at least log your finds in the paper log within the cache 
(when you can).  It's the least you can do for the cache owner.  The log is a 
historical record or the cache, and not logging is like erasing a piece of 
history.  Just imagine in nobody logged their cache, nobody would hid 
them.... it's no fun making a challenge if you can't see anyone accept.   
also keep in mind that nobody is keeping track of people's logs in the log 
books, so there is no real way to be competitive.   About the only thing that 
I could see mentioned on the list about it would be that someone notices that 
just about every cache they go to has a log from you, but there doesn't seem 
to be any on the web.  (the web logs read as Jeremy's incentive to keep 
geocaching.com up and running, if nobody posted, he would only have a bunch 
of hits on the pages to let him know if people were even geocaching, but that 
does "feel" the same.  Jason and I would probably shut down AzGeocaching.com 
if people stopped posting to the list for a while, even if the web pages were 
still gettng plenty of hits.)

Before I send this message I would like to point out to everyone, (partially 
restated from my last message about the oasis "scandal") that there are a 
large amount of people on this list (about a small movie theaters worth).  
You should take every single message that arrives in your box with a large 
grain of salt and remember that one person's opinion is exactly that, one 
persons opinion.  I have seen many people get offended on this list over the 
years (wow is actually has been years!) and they post comments in reply as if 
it's the opinion of many people on the list.  I would also like to point out 
that the messages about oasis were in fact just a couple of messages, but 
those messages split off into all sorts of different subjects and cause the 
mailing list to go from a message or 2 a day to a dozen messages when I woke 
up this morning, and all of them had very little to do with the origional 
post.   I hate to say it, but the more extreme messages are what keeps this 
list, and just about every list for that matter, going, and just about every 
time without fail they end in healthy, productive, conversation.... just like 
with the oasis messages.  (The same rule applies to chat groups as well)

Brian Cluff
Team Snaptek