ParrotRobAndCeCe

Wow! The Texas cache has been published! Wow! The Texas cache spelled "Capital" right

So YOU'RE the one that brought this on.... Amazing, huh? Last time I checked last nite, the online USGS height gauge for the river at the Frederick monitoring station showed that it was over four feet above danger level! Late edit: just checked the AM reading, and the river hit 9 feet above danger level, and is, at this point, approaching 10 feet above danger level! Wow! Well, we needed the rain! BTW, I am sooo tempted to take a kayak trip down the river today and have Sue pick me up at the Reich's Ford Road pullout below Frederick... It would be a wild ride! I hope you didn't do that, considering the river was up OVER Reich's Ford Road for a while there.

Looks fantastic. My only regret is that I'm not in your area to go for a FTF! Agree, it looks great. The one thing I would change is this: Please change the word "capitol" to "capital". I assure you the final cache can not and will not be hidden in our nation's capitOl

That's a fascist idea? Geez, I never even knew that facists were concerned with geocaching, let alone micros. I'm going to have to re-read my history books. Try reading a dictionary, too, while you're at it. I'm pretty sure he's talking about #2 below, and not Mussolini. fas·cism (fshzm) n. 1. often Fascism a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

Huh? Just because no one in your state requests one doesn't mean one won't make it's way into a cache around you. Just don't expect to see any Jeep TBs in your area until AFTER the contest. Some people like to hold on the the Jeep TBs for the length of the contest. Last year the rules were tweeked to eliminate this as an advantage. However there will always be some that will participate in this grab and hold lunacy. You are, of course, absolutely right. However, there will be a FEW that travel (at least for a while) and one or two are likely to make it to your state sooner or later. If worse comes to worst, you can always get a few at an event somewhere.

Because most of DC is off limits to physical caches. Most of it is either National Park System land and/or considered a high terrorist risk and off limits on GC.com. It's a 70 square mile city with 600,000 people living in it, and 5 million people living nearby, yet it only has about 2 dozen physical caches. Judging by that, I'm guessing it's fairly tough to get a cache listed in DC. Oh baloney. Very little of the physical area of DC is NPS land, and the "high terrorist risk" federal facilities are mostly concentrated downtown. Apart from the couple of dozen square blocks in and around the national mall, Rock Creek Park, The C&O NHP and random places like Bolling AFB, DC is a city much like any other.

Can you give an example of an area where micros are "crowding out" larger size caches? The cache saturation rules allow for over 100 caches per square mile. Are you telling me there are places that are SO FULL of micros that it's not possible to put a regular cache anywhere near them? Man, a cache density like that must be a number-hound's dream.

I know choice is probably a foreign concept to you, but perhaps the hider hid a micro instead of an aircraft carrier because they WANTED TO.

And I'm sure the other 27 people that live there agree with you

Huh? Just because no one in your state requests one doesn't mean one won't make it's way into a cache around you.

You're probably correct, but I'm curious what you think would be the source for arguments? Oh come on, Lep. You know as well as anyone on here that no matter how they are distributed, at least HALF of those green jeeps will NEVER, EVER see the inside of a cache.

By removing the logs, no not at all. By posting about it here, probably. Everyone knows it happens. It gets discussed here all the time. Delete the logs and move on. It just seems like by this you might be starting yet another "it's all about the numbers" fire. What difference does it make who it is or how many logs they had between them?

When it gets to that point, you make sure you let us all know. At that point I will concede that you may have a point. For now, though, in the REAL world (as opposed to CoyoteRed fantasyland), I still see plenty of people hunting and finding plenty of micros all over the place. *yawn*

I have to disagree with the above "rule" (who wrote it anyways?). I think it's too subjective to be making a "rule" about. From what I've seen, it's just as common for 'bad' regular caches to be placed as 'bad' micros (of course, this depends on your definition of 'bad' ...). I think so many people have said this (in one way or another) that some are starting to think it's true without seeing for themselves: "Everyone knows that micros tend to be bad". That may be why we so many "micros are bad" threads. ...and folks are claiming have eliminated micros from their general hunt scheme and seen an overall increase in the quality of the caches they're finding. That is the MOST ridiculous argument I think I've ever heard. The REASON they eliminated micros from their "general hunt scheme" is because they DON'T LIKE THEM. Of COURSE the quality of caches they find will increase (in THEIR subjective opinion). If I hated, for instance, seafood, and I eliminated seafood restaurants from my "general dining scheme", then I would perceive the quality of restaurants I patronize to increase. That doesn't mean that seafood is bad for everyone, just the person that doesn't like it.

If you're looking for micro containers, you might want to try CoyoteRed's store

Your stereotype is showing.

There's no way to filter out the really lame normal sized geocaches either, so it really isn't a micro issue. Some progress has been made in using Collaborative Filtering to determine, as an individual, which caches you may like based on other people's interest. Once we get the details sorted out better I'll have something to show you guys. In the meantime a look over the logs of each cache can often give you a feel of a cache. If you like the logs you can bookmark it and make a custom query of caches instead of the firehose attack that an everything query can generate. Yes, but now you're forcing people to READ the CACHE DESCRIPTION. Horrors. Don't you know that some people just like to download coordinate lists and run off without doing their homework? Don't you think that asking people to do something ridiculous like actually READING THE CACHE PAGE is forcing YOUR way of caching on THEM? How DARE you tell someone how else to play the game!!! (Me either, but that's the reaction I got to the same suggestion)

Did I *say* it was a perfectly fine thing to do? That was YOUR little addition. You wouldn't be trying to, say, put words into my mouth, now would you?

Oh lookit that, a thread about micros. How novel.

So YOU'RE the one that brought this on....

And what about all of the caches that are sitting directly ON THE GROUND? These caches are often senselessly killing grass. And hollow logs? That ammo can is cruelly and inhumanely suffocating all sorts of funguses, lichens and mushrooms. At least with a spike the tree doesn't DIE. I think we need to address this issue IMMEDIATELY! Cute. Until some ranger comes by, sees the stake and it results in a park system wide ban on geocaching. Its not a matter of whether the stake does real harm (the jury is out on whether it does), but of perception. Digging a hole to place a cache really doesn't really damage anything, but park managers don't want us digging holes in their parks. Nor do they want us driving stakes and nails or drilling into live trees. I'll bet they don't want us leaving crap on the ground or in hollow logs, either, but we still do it, don't we? We're just better at hiding THOSE from the ranger than we are spikes in trees.

There's a nano less than a quarter mile from my house I can't find for the life of me.

My thinking exactly! Of course, had common sense been followed in the first place, none of this would have happened. Had the "helpful" cacher logged correctly, the cache owner would have realized his was gone and, being a responsible cache owner, would have removed the imposter cache and replaced his, or at least disabled it. But he was playing his own game. Who are we to tell him that he can't do that? You're right. Common sense, unfortunately, is sometimes pretty uncommon.

My thinking exactly! Of course, had common sense been followed in the first place, none of this would have happened. Had the "helpful" cacher logged correctly, the cache owner would have realized his was gone and, being a responsible cache owner, would have removed the imposter cache and replaced his, or at least disabled it.

Argued to death already over in the website forum, Taz.