[Az-Geocaching] Cache Karma

[Brian Cluff]

trisha@brasher.com wrote:

>My original point, however, still is valid. If NOBODY hid any caches,
>there would be NONE to seek. So the people who hide NONE or very few,
>yet go find a hundred or two or more, are "riding" on the backs of
>those who have taken the time and money to hide the caches that others
>find. I am not complaining in that sense, as I enjoy hiding caches, so
>I can read the logs of the people who seek it. Also, I personally
>would feel guilty about using everybody else's caches for my
>enjoyment, and not giving back, if I didn't hide some of my own.
>
Jason originally came up with the concept of cache karma as a way to put 
a number on the amount of guilt someone could feel about not giving back 
to a game they were participating in and it was originally set to a 20:1 
ratio after a lot of discussion on what it should be.  At the time, if I 
remember right, there were just over 100 caches total in arizona, and 
just having 20 finds total was a major accomplishment.  So, after 
leaving it that way for a while, it started to be very apparent that the 
ratio we had origionally chosen would be rather ridiculous with the 
current popularity of geocaching.   I felt that the more caches there 
were out there, the less someone should be expected to hide one and came 
up with a ratio that is now a moving target, and is currently calculated 
as one twentieth the total caches in arizona to one cache hidden 
(totalcaches/20) : 1.  When I origionally changed to this formula, it 
was approx a 45:1 ratio, and in only a couple of months has changed to a 
64.8:1 ratio.  So you could currently find 128 caches with only one hide 
and still have a positive cache karma (Just barely).

I may change the formula again if it seems to stop working, but right 
now it seems to be keeping up with the growth nicely, but in the mean 
time, if you don't like the cache karma, nobody says you have to look at 
it.  It's definitely the number on the stats that is very debatable, but 
right now I have little time to debate it.  (hopefully in a couple of 
weeks they will hire a new person at work and I won't be so busy... we 
can debate it then if you would like :)

Brian Cluff
Team Snaptek