Talk:Geocashing achievement

This is a proposal made on 2009-06-11. Please leave comments and suggestions below, indicating your thoughts on the proposal, including:

• Support - you think this proposal should be added with zero or minor changes
• Do not oppose - you think it's boring/meh/not for you, but it wouldn't harm to have it created
• Oppose - you have a specific reason as to why this ribbon should not exist (state this reasoning in your comment)
• Needs work - you think the achievement should be created after more significant changes have been made

See Proposed achievements for more information on this process.

In an attempt to summarise the views presented below, I've created a table to signify which parts voters expressed explicit support or opposition for. Support will be indicated with an S, opposition with an O, and if they express a view somewhere in the middle, I've gone with M. Ideally this will allow for the more general opinions to be clearer so that the proposal can progress in some way. Users who have not made a contribution to any page on the wiki within the past year at the time of writing are additionally shaded in grey. --KerrMcF (talk) 00:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

	Finding Money	Earning Money (Legally)	Returning Bottles	Required Charity Donation	Consider Money Spent	Counting Regular Job	Overall Vote
Robyn	S	S	S	S			M
relet	S	S	M	O	O	M	M
Ekorren	M	M	M				M
Honorious		S					S
Jack1254	O	S			O		M
Mystrsyko	M	O	O		O	O	O
The ru		M			M		M
DanQ				S			M
Fippe	S	S	S	DNO	O	DNO	S
KerrMcF	O	S	M	O	O	O	M
Stevage	S	S	S	O	O	M	S
PeterRoder	M	M					M

A further summary of the above summary suggests that for older votes, newer votes, and the combination of the two, the consensus seems to be that the achievement should be available when you earn or find money, which may include returning bottles where this scheme exists, but may not include your regular job (unless you are paid in cash during the expedition). There should also not be a requirement for donating the money earned to charity (although geohashers may independently choose to do so) and the money spent during the expedition should not be taken into account. I've edited the proposal page to reflect these views and open the discussion on the new conditions of the proposal below. We're almost done with this one :) --KerrMcF (talk) 23:14, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

(New) Votes and Discussions

For the new version of the proposal dated 2024-08-18

Needs work. As PeterRoder pointed out, it's still unclear whether anyone has ever been in a position to achieve this. In the absence of that, we're talking about hypothetical scenarios, and the above colour-coded table is telling me that our opinions about those hypothetical scenarios are all over the map. The Old Geohashers seemed to lean towards opposing, and I've read enough of the wiki to conclude that those guys knew what they were talking about. Chesterton's Fence and all that :)

(My own $0.02 is that if you've got a reliable way of earning money, that's called doing your job, whereas if you don't, you're a well-dressed beggar taking money out of the hands of people who have a better reason than you to be begging.) Bottomley Potts (talk) 13:30, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Some valid points! I would just like to point out that only one 'Old Geohasher' actually opposed the achievement, and this was on the personal grounds of not wanting to do the achievement because it was work rather than any reason for the proposal itself not to go ahead (I think a lot of the early votes on proposals were due to people thinking they were expected to do these things rather than them being options for people to do and get an award for). This user also contributes to half of the opposing votes in the breakdown of the table due to their view that it should only consist of money found. I think reading through the discussions show that most users across the decade and a half of this proposal have been keen for this achievement to become something rather than nothing at all. I mentioned this in response to the aforementioned user but, as with all achievements, you do not have to do them, you can simply choose not to attempt that achievement (as many seem to have done with the Geobrush achievement, for example). It's also pretty uncommon for people to attempt proposed achievements unless it is their own proposal, hence why examples of this cannot be easily found; most proposals are for hypothetical scenarios. --KerrMcF (talk) 14:20, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

I understand that an achievement is not the same as a requirement for a valid geohash. Personally I would give the Old Geohashers the benefit of the doubt as to whether they were also aware of that distinction. I've read a lot of the Complete Works of Robyn, and she certainly was.

I think that if the Standard Stevage Disclaimer "Who cares, no-one is actually going to change their behaviour for fake internet points" is true, it's an argument against the achievement system in general, not an argument for creating all the ones we can think of. It's pretty clear, from some of the failed achievement discussions, that that's a historically minority view, and that people do believe it's possible for an achievement to be contrary to the spirit of geohashing, notwithstanding their own right not to attempt it.

Finally, I feel like "people want it to be something" isn't the whole story - some people want it to be something, other people want there to be an achievement called "Geocashing" because it's a cool name but are lukewarm about whether this should be it. Bottomley Potts (talk) 15:07, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Which specific part(s) of the proposal do you think needs work in order for it to be a more well-rounded achievement? You didn't seem to indicate towards what, in your opinion, should be changed. Something good can come from this achievement, but as Fippe said, a sweet spot needs to be found first :D --KerrMcF (talk) 16:21, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't really have anything to add to what I said initially. If people find those remarks to be in bad faith, an abuse of the voting system, uncivilised, or that I expect them to outweigh the consensus of the group, I'd rather you just deleted them or edited them to say whatever will be more acceptable. Bottomley Potts (talk) 04:01, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

(Old) Votes and Discussions

So finding money gets you an award. Stealing money obviously doesn't. Begging, busking, and offering things or services for sale may or may not be legal depending on your jurisdiction. Returning bottles for a deposit was a good suggestion. The name is funny, but the concept doesn't do anything for me in the spirit of geohashing. It's like a great name in search of an achievement.

You know what would make it more interesting? If the cash raised were donated to a charity. Or possibly if the geohasher just found a way to donate cash to charity during the geohash.

This user earned the Geocashing Achievement by raising $42.13 for The Vancouver Food Bank while playing a guitar at the (49, -123) geohash on 2009-05-21.

Also the achievement description needs to specify clearly whether it is necessary to reach the coordinates in order to claim the ribbon. -Robyn 04:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with most of your comments. My original idea was to encourage creative ways to make your expeditions less costly (thus invalidating the argument that oh I would certainly geohash more, if the tickets weren't so expensive). On the other hand, just returning a bottle makes the achievement a bit too easy to achieve. As you noticed, I struggle to turn this into a well-defined achievement worth obtaining.

Donating the cash to a charity is a good idea. I would not discourage to do this after the expedition, but only because I am considering that most of the "charities" I would encounter on the road aren't up to what they promise. I also do not wish to encourage achievements that *require* planning. If you have to prepare yourself with the banking coordinates for your charity of choice before your expedition, that takes a bit off the spontaneity of geohashing. And finally, spontaneously coming up with a way to earn money, *and* having the chance to encounter way to donate to a charity on the way is too much luck.

This definitely needs work before it can be considered as an achievement. -- relet 08:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

If there were interesting and somehow profitable ways to do that, I would probably try them, but I can't actually think of any realistic ones. Finding money is just luck, not creative. Returning bottles you found is possible but neither creative nor profitable at between 8 and 25 ct per bottle, with most of the bottles being systematically collected by homeless and other really needy people anyway, and many being so disgusting that you do not want to have them in your bag. May sometimes count as geotrashing, though. Begging people - no, thanks. Playing guitar - apart from that I don't play any instruments, in my ears most street music is just a more noisy variant of begging (exceptions do apply). On the other hand, the usual criteria for a definite "no" don't really apply here, so I struggle to find valid arguments to actually oppose it, but DNO would be too much of agreeing for me, while NW implies that I see a chance to rework it into something good. So, maybe... should fall into stasis. --Ekorren 09:10, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

This is interesting, I like it. Of course most of the time it's unachievable and depends upon luck and your skill at conversing with random people (getting them to pay you for random stuff). It would be interesting if you had a hash point fall in a farm and as standard protocol when one goes to ask old McDonald if you can dick around in his crop circle you also ask if you could do 30 minutes of farm work and get paid for it. Or if you're in a metropolis try professionally street begging or skit performing. Use your creativity which is the idea of the achievement. --Honorious 10:45, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Needs work. I'd like to oppose it but I can't really point out any specific reason. It takes the focus away from "having fun". I already have a day job, thank you. Also, the example given with Guinness and Jeppzer is invalid since they paid for a lot of gas to get to Norway. --The ru 09:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Needs work. I don't like how this discussion seemed to go beyond "earning money" to finding and stealing, and to balancing costs. I think this would be a good one if it was simply for "earning money" in the course of reaching your destination. Someone else would have to be giving you cash in return for a good or service. Jack1254 21:29, 27 September 2011 (EDT)

Currently oppose. Geohashing is about having fun and going on adventures. Trying to make money while doing so is work. It completely changes the goal of the sport. If this only applies to accidentally finding money while geohashing, I would upgrade to do not oppose. Mystrsyko (talk) 00:03, 21 October 2014 (EDT)

Needs work, but I'd support a well-made amendment relating to charity fundraising, as suggested above. --DanQ (talk) 07:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

The name is way too good to not do anything with it. Needs work: We need to find a sweet spot that we can agree on though.

• I don't think that taking the cost of the expedition into account is a good idea, that could get very complicated when trying to calculate the true cost.
• Does doing your remote day job on a laptop while on the way count?
• I don't think that donating the money should be a requirement, but it should certainly give you extra points.

--Fippe (talk) 03:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Needs work. Would definitely be a full support if:

• The requirement is simply to make money. Removing the potential of simply finding money makes the achievement more of an activity to be performed.
• The achievement only refers to the money made, and ignores the cost of the expedition. Not doing this just makes things too complicated and will drive people away from attempting it.
• Money must be made in a way that differs from your regular job. This makes the achievement more interesting and removes issues surrounding what "counts".
• It is not required to donate the money. I'm all for donating money to charity, but it should not be a requirement for the achievement. The original incentive was to partially negate the cost of the expedition, which is irrelevant if you are unable to choose to keep the money afterwards.
• Outside of this, maximum creativity should be allowed and encouraged. Finding different (legal) ways that people can make money during their expedition seems fun and realistically is a win for all involved.

I think opposing this proposal on the basis of "I don't want to work" is a harsh stance. As with all other achievements, if you don't want to do the activity, you are not forced to. This does not mean the achievement should not exist for others. This proposal is one of those which has been around for a long time, over 15 years at the time of writing this. Placing value on earlier votes is therefore difficult, as they are unlikely to reflect current opinions and are less likely to be from active geohashers. I would enjoy seeing this achievement become actualised, but past votes make this difficult, as they are unlikely to change for the previously mentioned reasons. --KerrMcF (talk) 00:09, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Support Seems frivolous in a good way. The text could be cleaned up a bit also. Stevage (talk) 02:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Do not oppose, leaning towards Oppose, with similar reasoning to Ekorren. Honestly the only thing I particularly like about this achievement is its name. I find the luck-based possibility (e.g. finding money, have someone approach you and ask for something) to be fairly uninteresting, and anything you can actually strive for would involve being an annoyance to other people (the possible exception being busking, which would likely overlap enough with the existing musical or circus achievements.) Maybe I'm just not creative enough - can anyone point to a past expedition which presented an interesting way to claim this (even if the opportunity wasn't taken)? --PeterRoder (talk) 12:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)