[Jack Aubrey]

Having shamelessly advertised 2 new caches (which marmal has ftfd today -well done sir! - he also got another!) and trailed a 3rd, I'm now opening a second thread to continue the theme under the guise of a discussion which climbers file under the absurdly hi-falutin' term "ethics" (eh, Nick?).

Haggis Hunter pointed out to me earlier today that my "Abbey Bridge" cache had been cited in a debate on the GC.com forums which was generally critical of "additional requirements" being added to caches. The basic theme of the objection to additional requirements was "I find it/ I log it/it counts. Who has the right to gainsay me my find?"

Now "Abbey Bridge" is - oh, what a give away - a bridge. It carries a road over a river and the cache is - oops, another give away - under the bridge. So you could just drive up and log it. I wanted to get you to take a walk along the river and back by the other bank. On the way you find out why there is "half a church" to the north of you. And I ask you to email me with the explanation, as well as finding the box, to claim a log.

I think, (a) the circular walk is a pleasant one; (b) the "extra fact" is interesting in itself; and (c) finding the fact in situ adds fun to the excursion in ways that only become obvious when you do it.

I am not inclined to change my cache at the behest of people from Lincolnshire and elsewhere who are unlikely to nip out to Haddington to do a cache (do these folk spend their time reading newly published caches and posting on forums or do they have lives?). But Haggis Hunter - a man I deeply respect - counsels me that some cachers don't read cache pages before they go a-hunting and some may be upset by additional requirements they meet when trying to log their finds.

I need the advice of other grown-ups (others than HH, who is definitely one!), so I come to this forum. I am, I confess, slightly saddened to know that people go hunting for boxes without reading the pages or at least carrying them on their PDAs. I take some trouble to research my caches and I like to get that stuff on dem pages, baby (maybe that's why there are so few - oh, shut up, AB, you heavily researched, wonderfully informative and emabarassingly prolific cacher, you!). And anyway, what about caches where there are access restrictions? (Tides on Go Forth/Gates shut on Boun'tae Get it etc)?

So. Alternatives for "Abbey Bridge". (1) archive the damn thing toot sweet before anyone is upset. (2) archive it if anyone who actually bothers to do it is upset. (3) make the additional information voluntary. (4) take up golf (anything but that!).

Consultative Jack
_________________
In the service of a Queen

[Wildlifewriter]

Even by the rather low standards of debate on the gc.com forums, there was a remarkable amount of bollocks contained in most of the submissions. Most of this was from the usual sources, so don't take any of it too seriously.

Your cache GCTA55 is unusual in its requirements, but there are many precedents for it.

Contrary to popular belief, there is nothing in the "official" guidelines about this. The policy at Groundspeak has always been: how a cache works and how it's logged, are matters for the cache owner solely - as long as it complies with the guidelines.

From a caching point of view, a matter of more concern might be that the answer to the controversial "question" can easily be found with a bit of Googling. It might be better to think about modifying the cache to be an offset, or multi-cache - which would enforce the sequence, and avoid people short-cutting the walk.

Just my 2d worth.

-Wlw.

[HighlandNick]

If you make it very clear what you require, you can always delete the log if folk don't do as you (reasonably) request?
Opens can of worms....

In retrospect, it might have been easier to make the walk to the church part of the coordinates to be found only if you went there to see it and found the info - an offset cache...
It might not be too late to do this but I'm not sure of the mechanics of changing details once they are published.

On the question of climbing ethics, what I do is up to me!! As long as I'm not fixing permanent gear, bolting, pegging in summer etc. So I can top or bottom rope, red point...but there again, I'm not "logging" the climb either.

[Wildlifewriter]

[ghiribizzo]

Hmm. Presuming that there is nothing contained within the bowels of the small-printed rules to stop you having the right to delete logs if cachers don't tell you 'why'; then it's up to them.
If they are not happy with your conditions then they do not have to go to the cache surely?

How many times do you consider a place you know and then find that someone has placed a cache there? - No, I don't mean disappointment that they've placed it before you, rather that they've made a half-baked attempt at it when you know there is far more information available relevant to the cache or that round the corner is something staggeringly good/interesting that they've failed to see.
In your case, you've included all the information for them to be led metaphorically 'by-the-hand'. If they just want a quick cache fix, you'll not convince them to do it your way.
An example could be my All Aboard#1 GCR0G1 (shameless plug). If you download the co-ords - drive there and you will be within 4' of the cache. If they just log it, they've missed the point, they've missed the walk. Wow. Another cache. Easy find. Tick...
- I spent the two afternoons in the Library, I had to get the 1850s maps out, I got the photos, I did the walk to get info. about the places on the way. They're not all interested in the info., the places, the items. Funny that not everyone that's done A/A#1 has been to #2 or #3? Hmm.
Those caches are all part of witnessing the history of the whole railway project concerned. Perhaps I should amend the cache and require them to advise me of a fact that's found part way along it's route!

- You're the Captain. The man in charge. Lead by example.
Carry on...
_________________
Anyone for a Hot Cross bun and a Creme Egg?

[Seacon]

I have a cache hidden on the North Antrim Coast near to the Giants Causeway. It's quite an easy find though I have set an additional challenge to the would be cache finders.

Quite often a large grey seal hangs out on the nearby rocks. I have asked cachers if they spot him to take a photograph and to post it with the web site log entry. An early finder has named the seal 'Finn' after Finn Mc Cool the legendary, mythical Giant who built the Causeway across the sea to fight the Scottish Giant.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=3cf609f5-b660-44d8-994f-48a7b0046ba1

This is not obligatory to logging the find but has added quite a bit of additional interest to the cache search. I visited the sight today for a maintenance visit and didn't spot the seal

Is an approach similar to this an option?

[Karl60]

Read the above logs with interest and I certainly agree with the overall theme. That said, I can see the point of the argument - and I've only read the initial post - originally made in the forum. That said, I actually find the discussion of real interest and worthy of a little - with coffee in hand - self analysis. In short, why do I go caching and how do I approach 'bagging' a cache? So some ramdon thoughts:

-- The primary object, I think, is to find the cache; we will enjoy the outing one way or another but finding the cache will be the ultimate aim I think. In doing so is there a sense/feeling that we have somehow 'defeated' the person who hid the cache - they hid it from you yet we found it. A definite sense of achievement. So finding the cache is, maybe, what counts and we don't want anything to distract from that, and when the cache is found it's almost over. No more distractions are welcome. In short, getting to the cache is what counts - particularly true when heading over the Scottish moor lands on a quest - what follows is an anticlimax.

-- We enjoy logging the cache online. We are recording our success for ourselves and the world to see: a little ego trip? And we wouldn't want anything to distract from that. No last minute obstacles thrown up to somehow reduce the glory of our success.

-- We all, I believe, enjoy to a various extent the numbers game: how many caches we have 'bagged'. So having achieved a cache find we want to be on to the next location to bag another cache. Anything that again distracts us from that can be an annoyance.

Well that's enough self analysis pseudo babble from me. In conclusion, I reckon I would enjoy your cache - which I haven't done - and thank you for the education all the more if it required me to do the walk in question before, and in order to achieve, finding the cache.

That's my thruppence worth (inflation).
_________________
Oh for more hours in the day

[allieballie]

It is your cache and therefore you can do anything you want with it - you have stated quite clearly (and in bold!) that you wish people to email you with the answer to the question. If they don't then you are quite at liberty to delete their log, I would have thought. If, as WLW mentioned, it can be googled, perhaps you could maybe let them know that you are willing to let their log stand if they go away and google the answer? Although I wouldn't put that on the cache page as it would just encourage people not to go to the church. Alternatively, you could offer a certificate for giving the information you require, like FoF did for her Holyrood cache - I don't know how successful that was, but I really liked that idea!

As others have noted, the sad fact is that most people just want to "find and go"! Everybody will have exceptions though - if a cache page mentioned details about passing certain points of interest on the way to the cache, and if one of those sounded like something I would really like to see, then I would follow that route rather than a shorter one. And if a cache page asked for the answer to a specific question in addition to finding the box, as yours does, then I would ensure that I did that.

I have to say that if it had been me setting this, I think I would have made a multi and used the church as a clue for the final co-ords (you know the usual stuff - number of windows/steps whatever - just something , even if it was only one question to give one of the final digits). If I think about setting a cache somewhere and there is something I would like people to see, then making it a multi ensures that the cachers are taken there - they can't simply go to the cache and miss out on other interesting sights. Unfortunately, I couldn't get a decent multi out of the objects for my cache at "Magus Muir" (answers could be googled easily), and I had to make it a trad. I included details of the sights to see if you follow the route clockwise, and whilst many people did do that, there were still some who approached anti-clockwise because it was a shorter route, bagged the cache and left without looking at the graves and the memorial.

Getting back to your dilemma, the fact remains that you have specifically asked for something in order to log the cache - it's not like you are asking people to do something difficult!

What I want to know is: do we get to see the Grecian Temple on this walk?!

[Jack Aubrey]

[Wildlifewriter]

Having read all the foregoing, I feel like I've done the whole cache already.

-Wlw

[allieballie]

[Haggis Hunter]

[Billy Twigger]

[Billy Twigger]

I don't like multis, so Captain Jacks way of setting this appeals to me. But I might be a bit $*@##*$$**@@ed off (it's ok - I can't spell) if I got my find deleted because I hadn't played it his way.
(AB didn't delete my Ceres Wanderabout log just cos I figured out where it was by the clues. Or I asked a farmer where old Vincent's stone lay, cos I had hopelessly transposed my co-ordinates!)

OK it's your ball, and you have figured out the most effective way to play, but aren't you glad William Webb Ellis had other ideas?
_________________
Let's face the music and dance

[Jack Aubrey]