Australian Power Trails

[gmj3191]

The records need some definition around them to overcome this.
Like the Guinness people do.

The wiki defines all.
http://wiki.geocaching.com.au/wiki/Cach ... s_in_a_day

Looks like it hasn't been updated in a while!

It's the Team vs Individual issue which needs to be cleared up. You could have a team of ten people split up and do a 1,000 simple cache power trail in a day easily.
Then a team of twenty people could come along etc etc and it all becomes meaningless.
I think it is the individual records where the real respect is earned, or team records where each team member signs every cache, but even then the team has the advantage, and the records should be differentiated.

[tronador]

My respect certainly goes to individuals, rather than teams.

[Big Matt and Shell]

The records need some definition around them to overcome this.
Like the Guinness people do.

The wiki defines all.
http://wiki.geocaching.com.au/wiki/Cach ... s_in_a_day

Looks like it hasn't been updated in a while!

It's the Team vs Individual issue which needs to be cleared up. You could have a team of ten people split up and do a 1,000 simple cache power trail in a day easily.
Then a team of twenty people could come along etc etc and it all becomes meaningless.
I think it is the individual records where the real respect is earned, or team records where each team member signs every cache, but even then the team has the advantage, and the records should be differentiated.

Isn't that what point 4 is about? That is the way I read it.

[Facitman]

The records need some definition around them to overcome this.
Like the Guinness people do.

The wiki defines all.
http://wiki.geocaching.com.au/wiki/Cach ... s_in_a_day

Looks like it hasn't been updated in a while!

I authored the original rules in wiki and then (correctly) allowed the community to contribute and update. The rules that are documented in the wiki don't align totally with MY view of how records should be attempted. Of course, I didn't go back and delete the updates I disagreed with but I wouldn't assume the rules as documented are the "official" rules. We never voted, so they ain't ratified!

[Marcus Vitruvius]

The records need some definition around them to overcome this.
Like the Guinness people do.

The wiki defines all.
http://wiki.geocaching.com.au/wiki/Cach ... s_in_a_day

Looks like it hasn't been updated in a while!

I authored the original rules in wiki and then (correctly) allowed the community to contribute and update. The rules that are documented in the wiki don't align totally with MY view of how records should be attempted. Of course, I didn't go back and delete the updates I disagreed with but I wouldn't assume the rules as documented are the "official" rules. We never voted, so they ain't ratified!

To be honest I think the rules have been defined pretty well. Of course...there will always be people who will go against the grain of 'what's right', which I think we've seen in the past, and will continue to see. I know it's a cliche...but the people who do are only cheating themselves.

[Tuena]

Isn't that what point 4 is about? That is the way I read it.

Point 4 clarifies how such large numbers of finds could be achieved in a day ie. Only one member of the team needs to locate the cache.

Groundspeak seems to differ.

Their Geocaching 101 states: find the cache, write about your find in the cache logbook.

[Marcus Vitruvius]

Isn't that what point 4 is about? That is the way I read it.

Point 4 clarifies how such large numbers of finds could be achieved in a day ie. Only one member of the team needs to locate the cache.

Not necessarily. It doesn't always take multiple people to find large numbers in a day!

Their Geocaching 101 states: find the cache, write about your find in the cache logbook.

Writing about your experience in the logbook is a trend that is becoming more and more redundant, as most cachers that I know choose to do so in their online log. I think most would agree that you're not going to write about your experience while at GZ...and then duplicate it online again. Besides...in many cases...especially in urban areas...to do so would only increase vulnerability of the cache itself...eg being muggled or the finder being caught in the act!

Power trails have probably only to increase that trend of not writing anything more than your caching name...as how many times can you write the same experience in every log for one hundred caches in a row!

[Richary]

Groundspeak seems to differ.

Their Geocaching 101 states: find the cache, write about your find in the cache logbook.

Which basically means all nanos and micros are redundant, but I will happily follow the guidelines on the next nano I find, and the CO can change the log scroll after each and every find A case of Groundspeak's "guidelines" not keeping up with current reality.

I don't expect owners of powertrails probably expect detailed logs in the logbooks, but that said if I ever do a trail, I want to find each cache myself, or be with someone else when they find it. I don't want to be sitting in the car while they hop out to grab the thing and I don't even see it. But that's how I want to play the game. If others are happy playing it differently it's no skin off my nose. My only competition for numbers is myself.

[Green Team 2]

To me, if you are an individual cacher you go to each cache you are claiming and sign the log. If you haven't been at the cache site and claimed a find you are a cheat, and just cheating yourself. To me it is black and white. At least I know that the caches we have done we have been there. We are going to do a power trail soon and looking forward to the experience. It is one way to break our daily record, but then it isn't about the numbers is it ?

[Rainbow Spirit]

There is now a 60+ power trail in Sydney between Windsor and Rouse Hill.

[Chrisval7]

To me, if you are an individual cacher you go to each cache you are claiming and sign the log. If you haven't been at the cache site and claimed a find you are a cheat, and just cheating yourself. To me it is black and white. At least I know that the caches we have done we have been there. We are going to do a power trail soon and looking forward to the experience. It is one way to break our daily record, but then it isn't about the numbers is it ?

I agree that as an individual cacher you need to go to the cache location and sign the log. I also agree that it is not about the numbers...EXCEPT in relation to my own records. The only numbers I am competing against are my own; as in how many I have ever found in one day. I am trying to break my own daily record.

As we have only ever found individual caches (so far, anyway) they have all been special and meritorious caches in their own right.

But that is how I choose to play the game. If others want to do it differently, so be it. If people cheat, they only cheat themselves. I take great satisfaction from knowing how much effort has gone into each of my finds.
Chris

[gmj3191]

But that is how I choose to play the game. If others want to do it differently, so be it.
Chris

Yes, but if we are comparing achievements to existing records, we need some standards and measurements around it.

[ian-and-penny]

Talking power trails, I was told about an incident that happen last weekend on a power trail at Stanthorpe where a couple of cachers got together and one did the evens and the other the odds and logged each others names. I just wonder who they are trying to cheat. Themselves or the rest of the cachers. It might make your numbers look good but in my mind if you havent got to the cache you havent found it. Maybe I am taking this the wrong way.

Maybe you are.
If there was a team member from each team in each vehicle, would it still be wrong?
If a solo member of a two person team is interstate and they both find a cache on the same day is it wrong?

Geocaching may be a solitary game for some, but there's nothing wrong with teamwork either.

Now back to power trails: How about long ones in the states where they take two small bus type vehicles. First one drops off a team member at each GZ and moves on until empty, the 2nd vehicle then comes along and picks up each person, passes the empty one and drops the next lot off, and so on.

[Yurt]

There is now a 60+ power trail in Sydney between Windsor and Rouse Hill.

We were headed to the lower Blue Mountains to do a couple of oldies when we noticed the new trail was published. Stopped along the way and picked up four FTFs just so I could finally grab the GCA locationless (Three in a Row). It wasn't very exciting just picking up micros although always good to get the FTFs. After a few we decided to head off. I note already that another cacher has also claimed FTF on two that we found. Not sure what happened except that it's hard to remember which ones you found if you find a lot perhaps.

Anyway I can save the rest for streak days perhaps.

[Rainbow Spirit]

I did the Windsor to Rouse Hill PT yesterday by bike. I parked the car at RH and rode up to Windsor, and picked up the caches on the way back.

Last year myself and Satanas666 found 60 caches around Bathurst to celebrate my 60th birthday, that took 14 1/2 hours, today I found 60 solo and it took 6 1/2 hours. I must say the Bathurst 'raid' was a lot more enjoyable, no disrespect to the HawkPT team intended. There is not a lot of mental effort required to find individual PT caches, well most of the time . Still it does boost the old smilies count, not that we care...

Give me an interesting and hard to find cache anytime, such as Bifrost