ONCE AND FOR ALL... No more beatin' around the bush.

[+Snoogans]

**Steps on soap box**

 

If any cache has been approved for apparently meeting the guidelines and there is no valid question that it does not measure up to those guidelines, then there is no valid reason to openly deride the cache for ANY reason based on one person's, or an entire group's personal aesthetics.

 

I have been called a hand wringing staunch defender of everything lame for this stance, but so far no one has been able to promulgate the logic to sway me and many others on this underlying issue of personal geocaching aesthetics that turns so many threads into slam fests regardless of the topic.

 

Personally, I have very high standards for my own caches, but I refuse to hold another geocacher up to my standards so I can continue to enjoy geocaching or to feel superior in the knowledge that I'm doing it better than the next guy.

 

A single cache is just one subjective smiley in a vast ocean of geocaching choices. If you can't take responsibility for your own choices, then maybe you need to reconsider whether or not geocaching is the right way to spend your quality time.

 

Here is some old wisdom I've posted many times before:

 

The hider is playing a game called geocaching. They are evidently playing it right because their cache was approved.

 

You are also playing a GAME (sport/hobby/obsession/etc.) evidently called MY version of Geocaching 1.5, or maybe even 2.O. You seem to be failing at your game if you are not able to enjoy it. -Snoogans

 

"Failure is a hard pill to swallow until you realize the only failure you can really have in this sport is the failure to enjoy yourself."

TotemLake 4/26/04

 

Please respond whether you agree or disagree. I never learned much from someone that always agreed with me.

[CoyoteRed]

If any cache has been approved for apparently meeting the guidelines and there is no valid question that it does not measure up to those guidelines, then there is no valid reason to openly deride the cache for ANY reason based on one person's, or an entire group's personal aesthetics.

 

I suppose the same argument could have applied to trading practices, code word caches, virtuals, cache proximity and a few other areas of established guidelines, rules and decorum. Therefore, I reject the quoted premise.

 

There is plenty about our hobby that is accepted as the best way to approach something. It is not addressed in the guidelines, but trading practices and meeting others at ground zero are but two right off the top of my head. By presenting your premise quoted above you set a dangerous precedence in that the only acceptable guideline is that written by Groundspeak, and rejects community driven and established decorum. "I can trade anything I want, however I want, as long as it fits the guidelines," would be a common retort for being dressed down for trading a brand new GPS for a pine cone. "You have no valid reason for saying anything."

 

I wonder if virts would still be around if those listing them keep a bit of "wow" in them instead of the junk that was being presented. The junk met the guidelines so the reviewers were forced to list them. Though there were complaints about the junk virts the defenders said, "they meet the guidelines!"

 

So does "meeting the guidelines" really mean they are good for the hobby?

 

Used to be that coming across a less-than-pleasing cache was far and few between. Today, you go into an urban area and it's hard to feel the same way. You have so many "gifts" on the street corner or parking lot that it's hard find the real treasures of the greenways, parks, and other locations that are actually interesting beyond incrementing one's smiley count. There's not easy way to filter these out. User-driven rating are shouted down every time the subject is raised. What's left to do? Accept it and move on? ...like virts?

 

Are we approaching a point where a reviewer has a new guideline that tells him or her when they see any new cache within an urban area that the cache owner has to prove "wow" in order for it to exist? How would you feel if the guideline was simply for all micros and smalls? ...non-trading caches?

 

And, really, whose fault would it be that this new guideline came into existence? Was it those who wanted "anything goes as long as it is within the guidelines" or those who tried to hold the line on quality?

[Clan Riffster]

**Borrows Snoogans' soapbox**

<You're done with it, right?>

 

I disagree. I am perfectly willing to pass judgment on an individual cache. I cannot stomach the concept that all caches are created equal, and therefore have an equal inherent value. To dictate that a film canister carelessly tossed into the bushes of a Burger King is somehow equal to an ammo can near a waterfall defies logic, in my opinion. I consider myself a very satisfied player, in that I've learned, (mostly), how to seperate the caches I prefer from the ones I don't, however, that doesn't mean I'm willing to sit idly by while the game devolves down to the lowest common denominator.

 

I have a certain amount of respect for your degree of tolerance, but I don't plan on emmulating it.

 

-Proud member of CCAB-

(Carpy Caches Are Bad)

[+sbell111]

...Used to be that coming across a less-than-pleasing cache was far and few between. Today, you go into an urban area and it's hard to feel the same way.

OK. Clearly you don't like urban caches, but I wonder why you limited your response to them. As I documented in one of the other threads, three of my first four cache finds were basically lamers. Of course, they were not urban so I guess that makes them OK in your eyes. The factis, however, there have always been plenty of 'less-than-pleasing' caches to go around.

You have so many "gifts" on the street corner or parking lot that it's hard find the real treasures of the greenways, parks, and other locations that are actually interesting beyond incrementing one's smiley count. There's not easy way to filter these out. User-driven rating are shouted down every time the subject is raised. What's left to do? Accept it and move on? ...like virts?

Many valid search schemes have been suggested. If you choose not to perform them, I'm not going to get excited about your failure to amuse yourself.

Are we approaching a point where a reviewer has a new guideline that tells him or her when they see any new cache within an urban area that the cache owner has to prove "wow" in order for it to exist? How would you feel if the guideline was simply for all micros and smalls? ...non-trading caches?

Just because you don't care for urban areas or micros (Heck, you've been involved with compains against them for years), doesn't mean anything has to be done about them. Luckily for the rest of us, the Universe doesn't revolve around CoyoteRed.

And, really, whose fault would it be that this new guideline came into existence?

Well, I'm thinking that it would be the fault of the person who rallies for such a guideline. In other words, YOU.

Was it those who wanted "anything goes as long as it is within the guidelines" or those who tried to hold the line on quality?

The problem is, 'quality' is subjective. You don't get to decide what's 'quality' for the rest of us.

[+sbell111]

... Please respond whether you agree or disagree. I never learned much from someone that always agreed with me.

Please tell me that this isn't one of those 'started on a bet' threads.

[+Snoogans]

Great counterpoint CR. I knew I could count on you.

 

 

However there is one weekness I'll quickly take the time to point out in your argument about cache placement and subjective quality.

 

 

Remember this: A single cache is just one subjective smiley in a vast ocean of geocaching choices.

 

 

Take any 10 Wal-Mart LPCs and prove to me there's a quality spot for placement within' 528 feet. I'm sure you could find 1 somewhere, but how about 10, or 100, or 1000.

 

 

A cache is a cache is a cache. It's just a choice. I seriously doubt many uninspired urban micros have displaced ideallic regular cache worthy spots with warm and fuzzy wow appeal within the minimum distance.

 

 

So the real problem is applied personal aesthics. Some people seem to want less choices. I'm guessing to reduce the time it takes to make a choice or something like that. I.E. I don't like urban micros! They should all be lined up and shot so I don't have to sift through them...... BUT somebody must like 'em because they continue to get visited and they continue to get hidden. Personally, I rarely choose to hunt an urban micro because they're not my thang, but I believe in live and let live.

 

 

In short, I'd rather have more choices than less. I seriously doubt the wow factor guideline you spoke of will ever get applied to traditional caches because a minority of cachers percieve certain types of hides to be a detriment to the sport. I fully understand, although I don't wholly agree with why virts became an extinct and grandfathered listing choice, but to compare virts and traditionals is nearly, but not quite apples and oranges to me.

 

 

Sorry, I don't have time for a longer reply. More later.

[+Snoogans]

... Please respond whether you agree or disagree. I never learned much from someone that always agreed with me.

Please tell me that this isn't one of those 'started on a bet' threads.

 

 

Naaaa, it was more like, HEY, why not take the underlying theme of several of the most popular threads this week and make one big FUN thread to discuss the issue out in the open.

[+Snoogans]

**Borrows Snoogans' soapbox**

<You're done with it, right?>

 

I disagree. I am perfectly willing to pass judgment on an individual cache. I cannot stomach the concept that all caches are created equal, and therefore have an equal inherent value. To dictate that a film canister carelessly tossed into the bushes of a Burger King is somehow equal to an ammo can near a waterfall defies logic, in my opinion. I consider myself a very satisfied player, in that I've learned, (mostly), how to seperate the caches I prefer from the ones I don't, however, that doesn't mean I'm willing to sit idly by while the game devolves down to the lowest common denominator.

 

I have a certain amount of respect for your degree of tolerance, but I don't plan on emmulating it.

 

-Proud member of CCAB-

(Carpy Caches Are Bad)

 

 

Nowhere in my post do I use the term equal or claim subjective equal value. To each his own. No cache owner owes you or me anything other than to have placed their cache within the guidelines. I merely stated that any published cache is another choice for good, bad, or indifferent. Choices are good things. Ask any Russian who did their shopping behind the Iron Curtain in the 80's.

[+SeventhSon]

Seeker: "Why did you bring me here?"

 

Hider: "To find a cache. Why did you come here?"

[+geomann1]

**Borrows Snoogans' soapbox**

<You're done with it, right?>

 

I disagree. I am perfectly willing to pass judgment on an individual cache. I cannot stomach the concept that all caches are created equal, and therefore have an equal inherent value. To dictate that a film canister carelessly tossed into the bushes of a Burger King is somehow equal to an ammo can near a waterfall defies logic, in my opinion. I consider myself a very satisfied player, in that I've learned, (mostly), how to seperate the caches I prefer from the ones I don't, however, that doesn't mean I'm willing to sit idly by while the game devolves down to the lowest common denominator.

 

I have a certain amount of respect for your degree of tolerance, but I don't plan on emmulating it.

 

-Proud member of CCAB-

(Carpy Caches Are Bad)

 

Three points:

1) Since I started placing caches I've appreciate more the effort of anyone who thoughtfully places caches, so I would not criticize any particular cache, unless I felt it was irresponsible in terms of its presence leading to damage or people endangering themselves..

 

2) I also agree with the above, that all caches are not equal and that there defintely is a quality element and that the sport of geocaching benefits if we all encourage each other to raise the bar, rather that taking the lowest common denominator approach. I know that it takes some effort to create and place caches people will enoy finding. I've made the decision to place fewer, higher quaility caches than multiple quick, lesser quality caches.

 

3) I believe that at least local originality (in terms of container, camo, location) is equally or more important (although it is part of quality). Granted with 390,000+ caches WW, pretty much everything has been done already. But if something already has been done in ones home area, why do it again?

[+Confucius' Cat]

I thoroughly agree with "to each his own" as long as the guidelines are followed.

 

BUT

 

I am not sure why, perhaps because they are easier to place and find, perhaps because newbies don't know any "better", perhaps they are placed by "numbers hos" who need more P&G's to help their numbers, perhaps any number of reasons, but the proliferation of micros IS changing the nature of the sport.

 

True, there are very few cases where a carelessly placed micro crowds out a potential "cool" cache. True also, that "cool" is a totally subjective criterion.

 

But, especially to a newbie, finding cache after cache that is nothing more than a film can and a piece of paper, leads to the assumption that that is how the game is SUPPOSED to be played. This makes it a self-perpetuating and ever increasing cycle.

 

The urbans and "everything lame" are a valid part of the hobby, but their sheer numbers are "choking out" the regulars in the sport. This is not because we have to "wade through them due to our personal lack of sophistication in filtering algorithms, but because those cachers who place "quality" caches are doing so with less frequency and those who place "ho-hum" or "lame" caches are tossing them out in droves.

 

The desire is more "choices". Do we really have more choices if what we have is simply more of the "wrong" choice?

 

Example:

there are 100 new caches, 99 are micros.

 

Assume I don't like "lame" caches and I recognise not all micros are "lame". I set my search to eliminate micros because I assume most micros are "lame" based on my experience. This is the best I can do for filtering since we have no "lame" algorithm.

 

Therefore of the new caches placed, I have 1 more "choice".

 

As this micro spew continues, the people looking for regular caches actually have fewer choices.

 

Overall there are more "choices" but in my (hypothetical) preferred category, not so much.

[+Morgan's Marauders]

Seeker: "Why did you bring me here?"

 

Hider: "To find a cache. Why did you come here?"

 

Good answer! Good answer!!

[+Klatch]

A geocacher new to the game has lots of choices. There are lots of hiking caches to great locations and lots of micro caches in easy to get and find locations - some of which are lame and some that are not. But the situation is different for someone that has been active for some time in the game. I prefer the hikes to scenic locations. There are precious few of them left for me to seek within a reasonable driving distance. To say that I have lots of choices to play the game the way I enjoy it (and the way I originally learned to play it), is incorrect. My number of choices, as a percentage of new caches, has declined radically in the last several years.

The game has changed and to deny that is wearing blinders. I suspect the main reason is the quest for big numbers, caches that require a significant investment of time and effort (and gasoline) just don't have a sufficient return in smilies/day. The players are voting with their hide styles, and urban/suburban micro caches are winning, big time!

[+Miragee]

I thoroughly agree with "to each his own" as long as the guidelines are followed.

 

BUT

 

I am not sure why, perhaps because they are easier to place and find, perhaps because newbies don't know any "better", perhaps they are placed by "numbers hos" who need more P&G's to help their numbers, perhaps any number of reasons, but the proliferation of micros IS changing the nature of the sport.

 

<snip>

Last year, there was a proliferation of Micros placed by two not-so-new cachers in pointless locations. To me it looked like the only purpose of these caches was to offer yet another FTF to the other cacher . . .

 

I think it was about then that I stopped turning on my GPSr when I went to town . . .

[+briansnat]

Seeker: "Why did you bring me here?"

 

Hider: "To find a cache. Why did you come here?"

 

For many caches its more like:

 

Seeker: "Why did you bring me here?"

 

Hider: "So I can can increment my hide stat".

 

Remember this: A single cache is just one subjective smiley in a vast ocean of geocaching choices.

 

The problem with the trend these days is that it is becoming more and more difficult to find the oyster with the

pearl in that ocean, or even an oyster for that matter. There is too much seaweed to wade through to get there.

[+tozainamboku]

There is too much seaweed to wade through to get there.

Bushwhacking never stopped me from finding the cache.

[+gearhedd]

I agree that "Walmart Micros" or "Lamp Post Hides" are lame after the first time. But where else would you hide in that area and it's not taking up a good spot, it's just another smiley and thats why alot of cachers like are these easy finds. When you get a chance look for a hard puzzle cache or a 3-5mile hike cache and guess what ten or so cachers visits them a year yet the location or the fun solving the puzzle is not for the majority. I know cachers that see a multi or puzzle cache move on to the easy finds. Most cacher don't like kids parks because they look out of place or they find them boring. But I like childrens parks because I have three small kids who don't really like geocaching so they are perfect, most of the time they are micros because if they where ammo cans they would be found by the little muggles quick. I like any cache that has been put there with some thought , love those that are in great locations but funny thing there is no new locations unless a new park is built......my two cents

[+KBI]

The urbans and "everything lame" are a valid part of the hobby, but their sheer numbers are "choking out" the regulars in the sport. This is not because we have to "wade through them due to our personal lack of sophistication in filtering algorithms, but because those cachers who place "quality" caches are doing so with less frequency and those who place "ho-hum" or "lame" caches are tossing them out in droves.

That hasn't been my experience at all -- and I have been caching in urban and suburban locations all over the United States for several years now, as well as some cities in Canada and Mexico. Based on my observations most cache hiders seem to be constantly trying to out-do each other in terms of creativity and cleverness. Some succeed at the pizzazz thing better than others, but I think your characterization is a huge exaggeration based on my own travels.

[+Miragee]

Apparenly you haven't been to some of the suburbs here yet . . .

[+KBI]

Seeker: "Why did you bring me here?"

 

Hider: "To find a cache. Why did you come here?"

For many caches its more like:

 

Seeker: "Why did you bring me here?"

 

Hider: "So I can can increment my hide stat. If you don't like my cache, why are you here?"

Fixed.

[+KBI]

I'm leaving soon for a week-long vacation, and will be off the forums for a while. I'm happy to see that Snoogans' capable hands have now taken up the Defender baton.

 

Instead of yet again restating my position, I'm going to be lazy and simply re-post a couple of rambling rambles that I posted to the recent thread:

 

I love Geocaching. It takes me to great locations.

 

Sometimes that great location is a high spot with a nice view; a cool park or waterfall I didn’t know existed; a place of local, scientific or historical interest; or simply a quiet and pretty place in the woods at the end of a fun hike. Those caches are very enjoyable.

 

Sometimes all it takes for a location to be great is that the location is away from my TV or outside of my hotel room. Those caches are very enjoyable for me as well.

 

Sometimes the great location is the place my mind takes me during that awesome feeling of accomplishment I get from solving a clever and challenging cache puzzle – no matter where I happen to be sitting or standing when the cartoon light bulb finally comes on over my head.

 

Sometimes the great location is right here in front of my computer as I enjoy the anticipation of planning another cache outing – or later, as I have fun writing the logs and remembering what I enjoyed about my finds (or even my no-finds) that day. I enjoy everything about hunting a cache.

 

Sometimes the great location is the one I physically inspect, or imagine in my mind, as I work on ideas for my next hide. I’ve got lots of coords saved in my Garmin as locations where there is no cache ... yet. I’ve got lots of ideas, too. I enjoy everything about hiding a cache.

 

And sometimes the great location is wherever the cache hunt takes me – even if the location looks ugly or smells funny – because it means I’m Geocaching. I’m using a cool gadget to enjoy navigating to a spot where some other player has clandestinely placed something. Something of which the local muggles are totally oblivious. Whenever I'm caching I am, by definition, in on a secret; and being IN on such a way, way cool secret like that is a location that is sometimes just too cool for words – regardless how big the cache is, or where it is hidden.

- and -

 

I love to geocache. As long as I continue to enjoy this pastime as much as I have, I’ll keep doing it. If I ever find that I’m not enjoying it anymore, I’ll stop.

 

As long as I keep enjoying any particular element of the game (Travel Bugs, easy micros, puzzle caches, creating new hides) I’ll continue participating in that element. If I ever find that I’m not enjoying that particular element anymore, I’ll stop.

 

What you will never hear me do is complain that my fellow cachers aren’t providing me with adequate amusement. When you boil caching down to its very essence, all any geocacher is ever really doing is attempting to provide a fun experience for another cacher. Sometimes those attempts succeed at entertaining me; sometimes they don’t. The point is that the attempt is provided to me completely free of charge; and by someone who is, almost by definition, nothing more than an amateur entertainer. I have the choice to either take it or leave it. If I don’t like the Travel Bug, I can leave the Travel Bug in the cache. If I don’t want to solve the convoluted puzzle cache that requires obscure knowledge, I can choose to bypass that puzzle. If I get tired of finding ammo cans in stump holes, I can go look for something different. What I will not do is gripe because someone failed to meet my arbitrarily set standard or my demand for minimum acceptable entertainment. Geocaching is what it is. If I’m not being satisfactorily entertained by the caching I chose to do, it’s my own fault.

 

I’ve been enjoying this game for almost five years now. The most disturbing change I see is the sharp increase in the number of cachers whose philosophy seems to be quite the opposite. Some people actually get upset or defensive when they read comments like the previous paragraph, and some even go as far as to personally attack those who dare to suggest such tolerance and acceptance. Maybe the level of discontent has actually grown, or maybe it was always there and I just didn’t see it because I never spent much time reading the forums back then. Either way – while I respect the right each person to express their opinion, I find that I have more and more trouble respecting whatever the underlying ideals are that would cause folks to look a gift cache in the mouth and to actually complain that their selfish standards aren’t being met.

 

The menu is deep and wide. If you don’t like fish sticks, be adventurous and order the daily Fresh Catch special – why complain to the waiter just because fish sticks are on the menu? If you don’t like the restaurant, go eat somewhere else – why berate the owner for owning the seafood restaurant you chose when it was really Italian food you wanted in the first place?

 

I wouldn’t say the complaining really bothers me. I just think it’s strange, illogical and unnecessary.

 

Aside from all that, I haven’t really seen any negative changes. There will always be the odd grumbler, bumbler or vandal here and there, but of course that’s true of anything, and it can’t be helped. As long as the owners of this website continue their great job of managing the wholesomeness and viability of the game, and as long as participants continue to follow the guidelines, I think that having an ever-growing quantity and variety of caches to choose from can only be a good thing.

See ya'll later!!

[+Miragee]

Seeker: "Why did you bring me here?"

 

Hider: "To find a cache. Why did you come here?"

For many caches its more like:

 

Seeker: "Why did you bring me here?"

 

Hider: "So I can can increment my hide stat. If you don't like my cache, why are you here?"

 

Seeker: "Because I didn't know there was a guardrail behind these dumpters before I got here."

Fixed.

Fixed.

 

:anicute:

[+fizzymagic]

Let's rephrase that original position using another realm:

 

If any restaurant has been approved for apparently meeting the health code and there is no valid question that it does not measure up to the health code, then there is no valid reason to openly deride the restaurant for ANY reason based on one person's, or an entire group's personal aesthetics.

 

Sounds like somebody doesn't like restaurant, movie, or music reviews. Me, I find them quite valuable.

[+TrailGators]

I thoroughly agree with "to each his own" as long as the guidelines are followed.

 

BUT

 

I am not sure why, perhaps because they are easier to place and find, perhaps because newbies don't know any "better", perhaps they are placed by "numbers hos" who need more P&G's to help their numbers, perhaps any number of reasons, but the proliferation of micros IS changing the nature of the sport.

 

<snip>

Last year, there was a proliferation of Micros placed by two not-so-new cachers in pointless locations. To me it looked like the only purpose of these caches was to offer yet another FTF to the other cacher . . .

 

I think it was about then that I stopped turning on my GPSr when I went to town . . .

I am in the same boat Miragee. I've basically quit urban caching too. Hundreds of the same kinds of quickie caches is not variety. Edited May 5, 2007 by TrailGators

[Neos2]

Let's rephrase that original position using another realm:

 

If any restaurant has been approved for apparently meeting the health code and there is no valid question that it does not measure up to the health code, then there is no valid reason to openly deride the restaurant for ANY reason based on one person's, or an entire group's personal aesthetics.

 

Sounds like somebody doesn't like restaurant, movie, or music reviews. Me, I find them quite valuable.

I'm not sure the parallel example works for me. Restaurant and movie reviews etc are only useful to me if I gauge my interest against one reviewer consistently. Often what one person consistently likes, I will despise and vice-versa. If different people did the reviews every time, the reviews would have no meaning whatsoever. If one person, or even one group of people, continually complain about one book, it doesn't mean it's a poor book. I don't like something because "someone" else liked it, and hope I never get to that point.

 

As for the original post, I interpreted it a bit differently than you persent. I read it more as a plea not to come into these forums and gripe that

" 'cacherschmoe' put out 'x' kind of cache

--I really hate that kind of hide because it's 'x, y or x'

--so cacherschmoe should have to archive that cache because it offends my sensibilities

--and maybe it shouldn't have ever been allowed in the first place

--so why can't we have a rule saying no more 'x' kinds of caches"

 

If that really was the intent of the first post, I agree: I am not a fan of anyone being able to dictate the kinds of caches that are out for me to find, based on their preferences. I don't care how many people they can rally around to support their fevered grousing, I am not going to like or dislike 'x' kind of cache just because "they" do.

 

There are plenty of caches out there that don't interest me in the slightest, there are some I can't fathom why they exist, but I'd never come into the forums to browbeat and ridcule the cache owner for placing them. I've noticed that some of the caches I feel strong disdain for are on other people's favorites list.

 

But if you really want the whole truth, this continual harping on the same theme is probably causing people to tune out the argument. I know the usual participants think they're racking up big points with their finely-honed debate techniques, but honestly, the constant refrain from the same people is becoming a bit wearisome. Every argument has been trotted out time and time again, and even the acrimonious sniping is becoming a bit too predictable. I know that I seldom follow a thread closely after a certain number of posts, because I already know who will still be arguing and I can guess what point they have reached in the argument by that point. I can check in now and then, assure myself that indeed "he said this and then they said that" and click on to something more interesting.

[+sbell111]

Let's rephrase that original position using another realm:

 

If any restaurant has been approved for apparently meeting the health code and there is no valid question that it does not measure up to the health code, then there is no valid reason to openly deride the restaurant for ANY reason based on one person's, or an entire group's personal aesthetics.

 

Sounds like somebody doesn't like restaurant, movie, or music reviews. Me, I find them quite valuable.

Where can the owners of all the caches that you've found send the bill?

[+DocDiTTo]

A geocacher new to the game has lots of choices. There are lots of hiking caches to great locations and lots of micro caches in easy to get and find locations - some of which are lame and some that are not. But the situation is different for someone that has been active for some time in the game. I prefer the hikes to scenic locations. There are precious few of them left for me to seek within a reasonable driving distance. To say that I have lots of choices to play the game the way I enjoy it (and the way I originally learned to play it), is incorrect. My number of choices, as a percentage of new caches, has declined radically in the last several years.

 

Well said. There are a lot of caches I could hunt, however many of them don't pass muster. I'll admit I've gotten more particular about what kind of caches I hunt, and I have to take more and more road trips to finds caches of the style I enjoy. If this means I gradually find other hobbies to replace geocaching because there's nothing but garbage to hunt anywhere around home, so be it.

[+briansnat]

Seeker: "Why did you bring me here?"

 

Hider: "To find a cache. Why did you come here?"

For many caches its more like:

 

Seeker: "Why did you bring me here?"

 

Hider: "So I can can increment my hide stat. If you don't like my cache, why are you here?"

Fixed.

 

Seeker: because I didn't know it was a piece of trache until I got here.

[+TrailGators]

A geocacher new to the game has lots of choices. There are lots of hiking caches to great locations and lots of micro caches in easy to get and find locations - some of which are lame and some that are not. But the situation is different for someone that has been active for some time in the game. I prefer the hikes to scenic locations. There are precious few of them left for me to seek within a reasonable driving distance. To say that I have lots of choices to play the game the way I enjoy it (and the way I originally learned to play it), is incorrect. My number of choices, as a percentage of new caches, has declined radically in the last several years.

Well said. There are a lot of caches I could hunt, however many of them don't pass muster. I'll admit I've gotten more particular about what kind of caches I hunt, and I have to take more and more road trips to finds caches of the style I enjoy. If this means I gradually find other hobbies to replace geocaching because there's nothing but garbage to hunt anywhere around home, so be it.

I really liked Klatch's post as well. I hate to see another good guy quit like you DocDitto, but I would understand. We've lost some highly regarded cachers out here. Even when people put effort into their hides they got cut and paste logs because so many people are in it for the numbers now. So they figured out the game has changed and now promotes quantity and does not reward quality and so they felt unappreciated and so they quit. What they didn't realize is that many people like me were really did appreciate their efforts and were very bummed when they left. They left a big void that is being replaced by a complete lack of variety. . Edited May 5, 2007 by TrailGators

[+edscott]

I agree that "Walmart Micros" or "Lamp Post Hides" are lame after the first time. But where else would you hide in that area and it's not taking up a good spot, it's just another smiley and thats why alot of cachers like are these easy finds. When you get a chance look for a hard puzzle cache or a 3-5mile hike cache and guess what ten or so cachers visits them a year yet the location or the fun solving the puzzle is not for the majority. I know cachers that see a multi or puzzle cache move on to the easy finds. Most cacher don't like kids parks because they look out of place or they find them boring. But I like childrens parks because I have three small kids who don't really like geocaching so they are perfect, most of the time they are micros because if they where ammo cans they would be found by the little muggles quick. I like any cache that has been put there with some thought , love those that are in great locations but funny thing there is no new locations unless a new park is built......my two cents

 

Where else in that area? If the area is not suitable for a good cache then Why in that area? We can leave some spots on this earth cacheless. I'm waiting for someone to carry a lamp post skirt 5 or 6 miles back in the woods and stick a magnetic keyholder under it... That's a good lamp post micro.

[+Confucius' Cat]

I'm waiting for someone to carry a lamp post skirt 5 or 6 miles back in the woods and stick a magnetic keyholder under it... That's a good lamp post micro.

DUDE!

What a cool idea!

[+TrailGators]

I'm waiting for someone to carry a lamp post skirt 5 or 6 miles back in the woods and stick a magnetic keyholder under it... That's a good lamp post micro.

DUDE!

What a cool idea!

That would be hilarious. We've joked around about doing that.

[CoyoteRed]

...Used to be that coming across a less-than-pleasing cache was far and few between. Today, you go into an urban area and it's hard to feel the same way.

OK. Clearly you don't like urban caches...

I'll stop you right there. You're wrong. I have nothing against urban caches. Several are my favorite of all time and we own a few. Clearly being "urban" is not the issue. Let's not forget Tube Torcher was an urban cache. The cache that got me really hooked on caching is an urban cache. You may want to re-think your position.

[CoyoteRed]

Remember this: A single cache is just one subjective smiley in a vast ocean of geocaching choices.

 

Take any 10 Wal-Mart LPCs and prove to me there's a quality spot for placement within' 528 feet. I'm sure you could find 1 somewhere, but how about 10, or 100, or 1000.

 

This may well be true. I'm not sure what your point is about finding a quality location in a Wal-mart parking lot. I do think it misses the point of when someone breezes into an area, all he sees right off the bat is symbols on his GPS unit's screen. "Ah, there's one close!" He doesn't have anything to go by except that symbol and maybe a custom waypoint. He follows the arrow and finds himself in the middle of a parking lot. Bummer.

 

Say he sees the cache pop up and pulls over to look it up on the PDA. Hmmm... The description doesn't tell him much. Let's go check it out. Parking lot!? Doh!

 

See where I'm going with this?

 

Used to you could follow your arrow and most of the time it would point you to a park or other interesting location. Now, it might simply point you to a street corner. Because of this chaff, you have to really do your research before hand or be disappointed time and time again.

 

Unlike what Sbell111 tried to allude to I really enjoy a good urban cache. The problem I see is these are getting harder to find.

[Trinity's Crew]

A geocacher new to the game has lots of choices. There are lots of hiking caches to great locations and lots of micro caches in easy to get and find locations - some of which are lame and some that are not. But the situation is different for someone that has been active for some time in the game. I prefer the hikes to scenic locations. There are precious few of them left for me to seek within a reasonable driving distance. To say that I have lots of choices to play the game the way I enjoy it (and the way I originally learned to play it), is incorrect. My number of choices, as a percentage of new caches, has declined radically in the last several years.

Well said. There are a lot of caches I could hunt, however many of them don't pass muster. I'll admit I've gotten more particular about what kind of caches I hunt, and I have to take more and more road trips to finds caches of the style I enjoy. If this means I gradually find other hobbies to replace geocaching because there's nothing but garbage to hunt anywhere around home, so be it.

I really liked Klatch's post as well. I hate to see another good guy quit like you DocDitto, but I would understand. We've lost some highly regarded cachers out here. Even when people put effort into their hides they got cut and paste logs because so many people are in it for the numbers now. So they figured out the game has changed and now promotes quantity and does not reward quality and so they felt unappreciated and so they quit. What they didn't realize is that many people like me were really did appreciate their efforts and were very bummed when they left. They left a big void that is being replaced by a complete lack of variety. .

Do you have specific examples of cachers who quit because they were getting cut and paste logs and felt unappreciated?

[Trinity's Crew]

Unlike what Sbell111 tried to allude to I really enjoy a good urban cache. The problem I see is these are getting harder to find.

 

Ignoring the fact that your perception of good is completely subjective, what IS your plan for getting cachers to hide caches that will satisfy you?

[+TrailGators]

A geocacher new to the game has lots of choices. There are lots of hiking caches to great locations and lots of micro caches in easy to get and find locations - some of which are lame and some that are not. But the situation is different for someone that has been active for some time in the game. I prefer the hikes to scenic locations. There are precious few of them left for me to seek within a reasonable driving distance. To say that I have lots of choices to play the game the way I enjoy it (and the way I originally learned to play it), is incorrect. My number of choices, as a percentage of new caches, has declined radically in the last several years.

Well said. There are a lot of caches I could hunt, however many of them don't pass muster. I'll admit I've gotten more particular about what kind of caches I hunt, and I have to take more and more road trips to finds caches of the style I enjoy. If this means I gradually find other hobbies to replace geocaching because there's nothing but garbage to hunt anywhere around home, so be it.

I really liked Klatch's post as well. I hate to see another good guy quit like you DocDitto, but I would understand. We've lost some highly regarded cachers out here. Even when people put effort into their hides they got cut and paste logs because so many people are in it for the numbers now. So they figured out the game has changed and now promotes quantity and does not reward quality and so they felt unappreciated and so they quit. What they didn't realize is that many people like me were really did appreciate their efforts and were very bummed when they left. They left a big void that is being replaced by a complete lack of variety. .

Do you have specific examples of cachers who quit because they were getting cut and paste logs and felt unappreciated?

It was more than just cut and paste logs that drove them away. It is all the issues that are being brought up in the thread. Eventually the thrill wears off once you keep running into spew. It just a matter of getting enough straws on the camels back. I know several people that have quit/turned into Terracachers. Like DocDitto, I'm actually actually hanging by a thread myself. Hopefully, they come up with that awards idea. I'd love to have a button to ignore all the caches from certain people.

[+sbell111]

...Used to be that coming across a less-than-pleasing cache was far and few between. Today, you go into an urban area and it's hard to feel the same way.

OK. Clearly you don't like urban caches...

I'll stop you right there. You're wrong. I have nothing against urban caches. Several are my favorite of all time and we own a few. Clearly being "urban" is not the issue. Let's not forget Tube Torcher was an urban cache. The cache that got me really hooked on caching is an urban cache. You may want to re-think your position.

In that case, why did you single urban caches out in your post?

[+sbell111]

... I prefer the hikes to scenic locations. There are precious few of them left for me to seek within a reasonable driving distance. To say that I have lots of choices to play the game the way I enjoy it (and the way I originally learned to play it), is incorrect. My number of choices, as a percentage of new caches, has declined radically in the last several years. ...

The fact is, identifying the caches that you will most likely enjoy is as easy as ordering your PQs to leave out caches with a low terrain rating. As such, the fact that there is a high percentage of caches that you wouldn't enjoy is no longer important. It doesn't matter if there is one cache with a low terrain rating or one million because those are easily bypassed with the tools you have in your possession.

 

The only issue that remains is whether cachers in your area continue to hide the caches that you are likely to enjoy. If they are no longer hiding them, you can try to spur them on by hiding some of your own, having an event that celebrates them, or widening your search area. That cache down at Meier's parking lot doesn't affect whether there are good hikes available to you.

[+TrailGators]

If they are no longer hiding them, you can try to spur them on by having ....an event that celebrates them.

Can you elaborate on this?

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

A geocacher new to the game has lots of choices. There are lots of hiking caches to great locations and lots of micro caches in easy to get and find locations - some of which are lame and some that are not. But the situation is different for someone that has been active for some time in the game. I prefer the hikes to scenic locations. There are precious few of them left for me to seek within a reasonable driving distance. To say that I have lots of choices to play the game the way I enjoy it (and the way I originally learned to play it), is incorrect. My number of choices, as a percentage of new caches, has declined radically in the last several years.

 

Well said. There are a lot of caches I could hunt, however many of them don't pass muster. I'll admit I've gotten more particular about what kind of caches I hunt, and I have to take more and more road trips to finds caches of the style I enjoy. If this means I gradually find other hobbies to replace geocaching because there's nothing but garbage to hunt anywhere around home, so be it.

Much the same here. I hunt very few caches nowadays, particularly within 60 miles of my home, and much of my little cache hunting nowadays is done when I am traveling to a distant state. In fact I sometimes travel long distances just to seek a cache which ranks high on my list; I once traveled 1,800 miles just to find one such cache. I am not complaining at all about this fact that I have grown very selective about the caches which I will hunt; it is just that I am very selective about the types of caches which I will go after. On a recent trip to Kalamazoo, Michigan, my caching companion and I chose to pass up fully 3/4ths of the 30-odd caches which my wife Sue had loaded on the GPSr for me back at home, because when we arrived onsite, they turned out to be -- by my standards -- paltry puny pedestrian lumpen proletariat efforts, and some appeared to be downright illegal as well.

 

On the other hand, we all have different ways of playing this sport. My wife Sue, who is the other half of our team, is still very interested in puzzle caches, and -- kinda to my dismay -- cannot even turn down finding any new urban lamp post caches placed in our area.

[+briansnat]

Take any 10 Wal-Mart LPCs and prove to me there's a quality spot for placement within' 528 feet. I'm sure you could find 1 somewhere, but how about 10, or 100, or 1000.

 

I don't have to go very far for an example. About 2 miles from my house in fact.

 

It is the oldest and largest tree of its type in the state. I had been considering placing a cache there. OK, its not exactly something of earthshaking importance or universal interest, but it's a far more interesting spot than the guardrail in the supermarket parking lot 400 feet away where someone stuck a magnetic key holder.

Edited May 6, 2007 by briansnat

[+sbell111]

If they are no longer hiding them, you can try to spur them on by having ....an event that celebrates them.

Can you elaborate on this?

I'm thinking that if you had an event that was in an area that had a few medium length hiking caches and maybe placed another one to coincide with the event. You could all go find that awesome hiking cache. By showcasing the hiking cache as part of the event, you would have more people who like this type of cache at the event. In fact, you could hold the event at a location that required a short hike to even attend.

 

As part of the event, of course you could speak about how important you feel it is that those of you who absolutely love this type of cache get off your duffs and hide more of them.

[+TrailGators]

If they are no longer hiding them, you can try to spur them on by having ....an event that celebrates them.

Can you elaborate on this?

I'm thinking that if you had an event that was in an area that had a few medium length hiking caches and maybe placed another one to coincide with the event. You could all go find that awesome hiking cache. By showcasing the hiking cache as part of the event, you would have more people who like this type of cache at the event. In fact, you could hold the event at a location that required a short hike to even attend.

 

As part of the event, of course you could speak about how important you feel it is that those of you who absolutely love this type of cache get off your duffs and hide more of them.

I was talking about urban caches. We have plenty of hiking caches around here. In the summer it gets too hot to hike so urbans are better...

[+TrailGators]

Take any 10 Wal-Mart LPCs and prove to me there's a quality spot for placement within' 528 feet. I'm sure you could find 1 somewhere, but how about 10, or 100, or 1000.

 

I don't have to go very far for an example. About 2 miles from my house in fact.

 

It is the oldest and largest tree of its type in the state. I had been considering placing a cache there. OK, its not exactly something of earthshaking importance or universal interest, but it's a far more interesting spot than the guardrail in the supermarket parking lot 400 feet away where someone stuck a magnetic key holder.

I would like that spot! I also think that there are plenty of spots to hide caches besides overused lamp posts and guard rails.

[+sbell111]

Take any 10 Wal-Mart LPCs and prove to me there's a quality spot for placement within' 528 feet. I'm sure you could find 1 somewhere, but how about 10, or 100, or 1000.

I don't have to go very far for an example. About 2 miles from my house in fact.

 

It is the oldest and largest tree of its type in the state. I had been considering placing a cache there. OK, its not exactly something of earthshaking importance or universal interest, but it's a far more interesting spot than the guardrail in the supermarket parking lot 400 feet away where someone stuck a magnetic key holder.

I would like that spot! I also think that there are plenty of spots to hide caches besides overused lamp posts and guard rails.

I'm thinking that the fact that the cache is on a guard rail wouldn't stop one from viewing the tree. In fact, many would suggest not hiding the cache too close to the tree for fear that it would get damamged in the search. Of course, if it is a healthy speciman, it is unlikely that any damage will occur. I'm just reminded of on cache that was hidden on a tree that was not in the best of health and considerable damage was done.

[+sbell111]

If they are no longer hiding them, you can try to spur them on by having ....an event that celebrates them.

Can you elaborate on this?

I'm thinking that if you had an event that was in an area that had a few medium length hiking caches and maybe placed another one to coincide with the event. You could all go find that awesome hiking cache. By showcasing the hiking cache as part of the event, you would have more people who like this type of cache at the event. In fact, you could hold the event at a location that required a short hike to even attend.

 

As part of the event, of course you could speak about how important you feel it is that those of you who absolutely love this type of cache get off your duffs and hide more of them.

I was talking about urban caches. We have plenty of hiking caches around here. In the summer it gets too hot to hike so urbans are better...

If you take another read of my post and the one that I was responding to, you will note that we were discussing hiking caches.

 

Of course, an event is the perfect place to talk about any good caches and hiding techniques. It wouldn't take too much imagination to come up with an event the celebrates caches that you like. Perhaps you could include a pre-event wagon train to great urban caches that you preselect. Then, you will have common ground to foment conversation at the event.

Edited May 6, 2007 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

Of course, an event is the perfect place to talk about any good caches and hiding techniques. It wouldn't take too much imagination to come up with an event the celebrates caches that you like.

Most of the local urbans I like the best take a couple of hours to several hours to do. Even if we did that a most people have already found those caches. I wouldn't want to focus an event on just what I like. I'm not like that. It should involve what lots of people like. What would you or others in this thread consider to be "good" urban caches? Edited May 6, 2007 by TrailGators

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Why would anyone think this thread is going to end the debate when the 1,000,000,000 or so previous ones didn't?

[+Snoogans]

Take any 10 Wal-Mart LPCs and prove to me there's a quality spot for placement within' 528 feet. I'm sure you could find 1 somewhere, but how about 10, or 100, or 1000.

I don't have to go very far for an example. About 2 miles from my house in fact.

 

 

And your other 9 examples......? I don't dispute that things like this happen occasionally, but I'd like to see someone prove a trend in their area. I keep hearing how LPCs are hurting the sport, but bottom line, more caches are better for geocaching than less.

 

 

I had been considering placing a cache there.

 

 

Ummmm, ya snooze, ya lose.