bittsen

If I am, I'd hardly be looking for someone who said he wouldn't post any more on this thread... yes, interesting indeed. Show me where I said that.

I dont think there was any attempting going on. You have presented a viewpoint that seems to be very counter intuitive. Presenting a front that Caches should not be be 5's Requiring special equipment or skills.... To be precise, I said I see no need for them but also said I couldn't care less if they existed. I see some as ridiculous. Much as I see arguing with people on the internet.

I thought I was debating with that poster too, but despite numerous attempts at trying to steer it back, I kept getting new, unrelated things thrown up. I guess bittsen is content in his / her original statement: Note who started the use of the word "elitist" in this thread. Note also this has nothing to do with the OP's issue, and has nothing to do with urban vs rural caches, both of which bittsen attempted to bring up when I tried to discuss this one short simple statement. bittsen thinks that caches he / she does not care for should not be part of geocaching, that people who place them are selfish and elitist. And this is not a selfish attitude? I also find the statements about "compassion" to be darkly funny in view of what bittsen thinks of the Special Olympics. But whatever. I'm trying to defend the right for even caches I can't do / don't care for to exist, but bittsen would not discuss the issue. I surrender too to the ~LOL~. Attempting to get people to gang with you against me? Interesting.

Don't pet the sweaty things. It would take more than allowed in this forum to offend me. Its very difficult to do. Enjoy your puzzle caches.

You are correct but there was one individual who questioned what I did call the CO. ~LOL~

Thanks. I've always been told I was twisty....wait.....no.....it was kinky I was called.

You know what would be great? If there was... oh, I dunno, some kind of website where you could enter your location and see if there are any caches nearby. Isn't that what I said?

Yes that would be a classic ALR. (or perhaps you saw this on a virtual cache). ALRs got banned because there are a lot of people who agree with bittsen. They believe that geocaches that ask you to do something beyond finding as cache are just a way for annoying control freaks to make you do something you don't want to do. We all want to find caches. Why is someone asking us "to stand on my head, wiggle my ears, facing east, flashing my genitals, just to get a smiley"? At first the guidelines were changed to have such caches listed a unknown type. That way, at least, you would have to read the cache page before you looked for the cache and could decide if you wanted to do it. You could always just skip the caches that asked you to do something you didn't want to do. However, by recognizing such caches some people hid ones that asked for some pretty ridiculous things. I think the reviewers would have no problem drawing the line at flashing your genitals but there was a big gray area between a simple fun task that would add to the experience of finding the cache and the obviously unacceptable. Based on prior experience trying to write guidelines that dealt with these gray areas, TPTB declared that all ALRs would be optional - that as long as the cacher had signed the physical log book, the owner could not delete an online find just because they person did not to the ALR. Of course this still allowed a cache owner to delete the online log if the finder did not sign the physical log. An exception was made to ALRs for what are called challenge caches. These are cache where you must complete a geocaching related challenge (such as finding a cache in every county in your state) in order to log a find online. Outside of ALR are the caches where the cache owner has placed a physical or mental challenge just to get to the cache and sign the log. bittsen may feel that these caches are elitist if the challenge is one that most cachers cannot do. He is entitled to this opinion. However, I believe that most geocachers understand that not every cache is meant for them. Plenty of cache hiders choose to hide mostly caches that anyone (or at least most cachers) can find. They like putting out caches that will get lots of finds. But they are many people who actually prefer a challenging cache that not everyone is able to do. Caches are placed in terrain that requires special equipment, others use hiding techniques that require some problem solving in the field and maybe some special equipment to retrieve the cache (maybe the cache is in that pole and if I pour water in the cache will float out), and some require a puzzle to be solved at home just to get coordinates. None of these are considered ALRs because they put the challenge before finding the cache and signing the log. These caches are very popular with some segments of the geocaching community. It would be a shame if we were forced to hide (and find) only caches that were doable by a majority of geocachers. The diversity in the kinds of geocaches hidden makes the game popular. With people hiding the kinds of caches they like to find, the numbers of different types of caches stays pretty much in proportion to numbers of caches who enjoy finding them. Now from time to time I have seen where a few people in a area try to out do one another by hiding difficult puzzles. The non-puzzlers in the area start to complain that there are too many new puzzles or that the puzzles are blocking an area where they want to hide a traditional cache. In the cases, I have seen these puzzle wars are short lived and soon the puzzles fall back to just a small number of the caches placed. In the long run most of the caches placed will be ones that most caches can find and a few puzzles and 5 star terrains will be there for the people that like that sort of thing. Well written. Thanks.

Thats been one of my points all along. Do the cache owners actually read the written logs? What about the micros? Do the cache owners actually record all the names of people who have found them? Sorry, but you point has changed so many times I'm not sure what we are talking about anymore. I read the paper log every time I go out to one of my caches. Do I make it a point to record and compare the names? Only if I have a reason to suspect a problem. I still am having a problem understanding why you seem to think ill of the fact that there are caches for every type of cacher?There are caches for those who like puzzles and for those who can't hike. Caches for those who like to climb and those who love history. There are caches for those who can't swim and for those don't like the woods. I think the most elitist thing mentioned in this thread is your apparent belief that caches shouldn't exist if they don't please your particular sensitivities. And I'd like to point out that most of the people you are arguing with agreed that the op should have been allowed to log. They just don't think that it is the case in every incident. I don't think thats the case in every incident either. What you, and apparantly several others, are missing is that I am voicing my opinion about ridiculous (imho) guidelines for "claiming a cache" and ridiculous (imho) caches. Am I offended that they exist? Absolutely not. Do I see them as a needed aspect of the game? Absolutely not. Am I hurt because they are there? Absolutely not. Do I laugh that people actually find these enjoyable? Yes, but then I am also equally amused by some people and their "other" methods of enjoyment (edited because this is a site that should be safe for families)

You have no idea how wrong you are about me. ~LOL~

No, muggles are free to join in any time they want to. There are no limiting factors other than the need for a computer.

I assure you, my undies are not in a bunch. Just as some would argue that ALR caches serve a purpose, you say others do. I don't set the rules. I have merely said, a few times, I don't see the need for caches with additional tools beyong a GPS and a body. That was how the "game" was born, isn't it? At the same time the cliff face cache could serve as a reminder to those who are unable to go rock climbing due to age or other physical restraints, just what they can't do and never will. Two sides to every argument Elitist is my word. I am sure the word has a completely different meaning to you. See #2 and 3 on this page http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=elitist I never asked for ANY cache to cater to me. Some could see things that way. Of course catering to a minority wouldn't be exclusionary.

I answered the questions. I just did it in a long written way. Your new question. "how is it selfish? We all do this game for our own selfish reasons but to make a cache that is overly elitist (meant to exclude many people) is overly selfish (but that is human nature). It is selfish because the CO is actually getting enjoyment by knowing that someone spent a long time, and/or a lot of effort, just to sign their little piece of paper all the while knowing some people just aren't up to their challenge. I'm sorry if you can't see the selfish aspect. I would suspect you are one of those who get off making difficult geocaches, but, again, that would be digressing. Just by writing a lot doesn't mean that you have answered anything. It just means you wrote a lot. I am someone who enjoys creating difficult puzzle caches; I do it because I know that there are a lot of people around here who enjoy a difficult puzzle with a nice hike to the final location. There are people who don't want anything to do with solving a puzzle to find the final location and I'm completely fine with their decision to ignore my caches. Puzzle caching is in no way similar to poodle shaving as the end result of a good ol' fashioned poodle shaving is just a shaved poodle and a pile of hair. The end result of a puzzle is a cache location. It's a natural extension of the challenge much in the same way multicaches are or a clever hide is rather than an unconnected. There is a difference and based on your posts I'm beginning to suspect that you are either unable to conceptually grasp that people might have other interests than you or are stubbornly unwilling to concede that variety in intellectual and physical challenges is a GOOD thing. I am not sure what you're advocating but whatever it is it seems a lot more bland than the current state of affairs. What are you suggesting? I am honestly unsure: uncammoed similar boxes sitting out in the open on a sidewalk? Should there be no creativity in caching? At some level any cache is going to challenge someone and that's part of the fun. I'm not sure you're totally grasping the concept of elitism or selfishness when it comes to cache creation. People who solve puzzles or go after difficult caches don't think that they're better than the next cacher. They're going after the caches because it is satisfying. People who create the caches don't smugly giggle each time someone spends a lot of time and can't solve their puzzle or realize that they don't have the physical skills to attempt the cache. They don't think "I'm glad I deprived that cache to that guy!" The whole basic concept of geocaching is sharing experiences with others whether it be a neat spot in the woods, the thrill of finding a nicely cammoed urban micro, the "aha!" moment that comes with solving a difficult puzzle or the adrenaline surge from finally having the cache container in ones hands at the top of a particularly difficult physical challenge. When that experience isn't shared I don't think it's a cause for celebration; people want their caches to be found and their experience shared. I create caches to be found. If someone is having trouble with the puzzle, I'm more than happy to incrementally walk them through the puzzle all the way to the end; there is nothing more dissatisfying than having someone give up. I understand elitism and abhor and avoid it at all costs. The logic you're using is specious at best and is an affront to those who spend considerable time and effort to create caches that they think people will enjoy. I knew it. ~LOL~

Thats been one of my points all along. Do the cache owners actually read the written logs? What about the micros? Do the cache owners actually record all the names of people who have found them?

I answered the questions. I just did it in a long written way. Your new question. "how is it selfish? We all do this game for our own selfish reasons but to make a cache that is overly elitist (meant to exclude many people) is overly selfish (but that is human nature). It is selfish because the CO is actually getting enjoyment by knowing that someone spent a long time, and/or a lot of effort, just to sign their little piece of paper all the while knowing some people just aren't up to their challenge. I'm sorry if you can't see the selfish aspect. I would suspect you are one of those who get off making difficult geocaches, but, again, that would be digressing.

You are free to find my replies offensive if you want to. Everyone is free to choose. I am not the kind to make an offensive post without the postee knowing for a fact it was meant as offensive. My feelings on internet offensiveness are that its like competing in the special olympics...you know the end. You keep comparing apples to oranges. As I have said numerous times, my original point was about the short woman living in an average sized world. The point is made that there are enough elitist caches that this one cache should not have been denied because she failed to bring a step stool. I have digressed. If you want answers to the questions, make them pertinent to my points. I don't give a flying freak what caches are what and where, for the most part. I will, or will not, seek them as I see fit. My points about elitism were generic. I still don't see the need for puzzle caches as they are a mixture of puzzle solving and geocaching. We might as well mix poodle shaving and geocaching.... I digress more. I have read a lot about how one group will consider urban caching as less than "real" geocaching. Why is it wrong for me to say the opposite is true? It's not. In fact, the mere presence of mugglers makes urban caching interesting. I have found half of my finds in the woods and such and, frankly, spending a half hour looking for a cache with nobody around is equally as interesting as trying to locate a 1/1 with 100 other people in the park. Did I digress? Hmmm. At any rate, there are LOTS of reasons and ways to hide caches. Lots of people who believe their hide is excellent. Lots of people thinking their find is awesome. It's all in the beholder. Just as I won't search a garbage cache, I won't do a complex puzzle cache. The funny thing is I can appreciate the mentality of the one who hides the garbage cache and the one who creates the complex puzzle cache. I see the need for neither though. Back to the original point. There was a "normal" cache that was hidden. The CO appeared to place it with the intent that it was easy to get and log. Then the CO denied someone a "find" because, though she found the cache, she was unable to reach it due to a physical "limtation". I personally think the CO was not being a very good person (not to offend you with language). I believe the CO was not acting in the good intent of the "game" and was taking an elitist stance. My stance was not from a geocachers perspective but from a compassionate human perspective. I know, some can't quite feel empathy. Its sad but true. I stand by my original thoughts. Happy now? I believe I answered your questions in my own (offensive?) way.

Additional Logging Requirement. No longer allowed. Ah, so many puzzle caches fall into a grey area then... And the ones who say "You must email me with the text from the sign that is next to the oak tree" as well. Or is that a classic example of an ALR?

I have a confession. I don't know what an ALR cache is.

Geocaching last Sunday morning (2AM) ran into the police. They were saying they didn't hear of geocaching by name but when I described what it is they said "Oh yeah, we had a bulletin about that". Mind you these were airport police. They said that they were warned that not all "containers" were pipe bombs. I'm thinking of going to the police station to give them the address of geocaching so that if they get a call on a pipe bomb, they can first check to see if its listed asa a cache. I would recommend this to anyone who feels it is a good idea.

My bad on #2. SCUBA did come to mind as well as snorkeling caches (which are two separate types) but it was only a partial list.

You are correct. Most of my replies were about the short woman who couldn't reach an average height persons cache. In other words, addressing the OPs concerns. The fact that it wasn't even designed as an elitist cache merely exacrebates the issue. She told the CO that she was just too short to reach it and the CO said tough tatas and deleted her "find". And then a few come in here to say "No signey, no smiley" and to that, in this ONE circumstance, I say it's a BS stance to take. It wasn't designed as an elitist cache.... why force a short person to have to get special equipment (which she admits to doing). Anyhow... Though I can't appreciate the elitist caches and the complicated caches, I enjoy geocaching. I have gone out in the woods and I do urban caching but I have MUCH better things to do with my life than to stand on my head, wiggle my ears, facing east, flashing my genitals, just to get a smiley. I know, others have the time. More power to them but, in no way, will I consider them better than I am simply because they do. BTW, this is my stance everywhere in life. And I don't conider myself better than they are because of the things I can do that they can't or simply don't do.

My use of the word "elitist" is broad. It implies that, in this case, the cache hider is trying to create something that many people simply cannot do. A few examples. 1) A boat cache. Not everyone owns a boat. Sure, the argument is made that for those who do own boats there is an opportunity to cache somewhere they might be enjoying their boat anyhow. And, of course, the argument could be made that anyone could charter a boat to take them to a boat cache (ie island) so they might find the cache. I would classify boat owners as an elite class even though there are some who would argue the point. 2) Though I doubt it has happened, there is a possibility for placing a cache on the face of a cliff. Sure, the argument is made that anyone could learn how to rock climb (or rappel) to get the cache or otherwise hire someone or rent some equipment to get them donw the cliff face, but in reality this cache would be, by design, only for those who are already rock climbers. Wouldn't you agree this is an elite class? 3) Caches placed high in trees. Sure you could bring climbing gear to the tree and climb it if you aren't otherwise able to climb the tree but wouldn't this create an elite class? Most people over the age of 18 don't regularly climb trees. Most geocachers are over 18. So, again, this would make this "tree cache" an elitist cache for those who can climb trees. (Please bear in mind the difference between having to climb a tree as opposed to just looking in one) The issue is that caches shouldn't necessarily be subject to the rules set by some organizations regarding accessibility for handicapped persons but designing a cache where a subset of the general population can achieve the goal is, in essence, elitist. Now, before this gets too far off track, I think posting a cache where "everyone" should be able to get it, and then not allowing someone to claim it because they were physically unable to get it, is just plain absurd. I understand that people "own" the cache but some take this ownership a little far. At best, geocaching is a game of "fun" and when it stops being fun, people will quit playing. Yes, it's supposed to be fun for the CO and the searcher and yes some people have fun making people jump through flaming hoops to claim the virtual prize (lets face it, other than treasures, its all virtual as far as the prizes go) is a little, oh whats the word, elitist. And yes, there are some who enjoy the littls and sometimes big challenges but that subset is small, judging by the # of "finds". Again, it's an elitist group. Don't believe me? Listen to them brag about how they got it sometime. They are, in their own subtle way, saying "I'm better than you are because I got it and you didn't. That IS elitist. Did that satisfy your need for clarification? Are you happy I jumped through your hoop? I am just happy that this game has more "normal" people than those who feel the need to make the "game" hard or difficult (as opposed to challenging). When I hide my caches, I am going to get my jollies knowing that people walk past it all the time and never see it but there is a small subset of the population that will know its there. It's my fantasy of a secret society and not some subset of that same secret society. Why else would we all worry about muggles?

You know that isn't what I said, or implied. If you want to bait me, you will have to do better. What I see lacking in some of the arguments, is the basic common sense when it comes to "placing caches" for a game that is supposed to be open to everyone. The arguments are those of exclusivity. I doubt that was the intent of Groundspeak.

I think you just want to argue. Good day.

Not "in a tree" but "up a tree". And yes, I know there are "some" who would enjoy those caches. I suppose it would be logical to assume, then, that the cache owner would be placing caches for a small majority, as opposed to the general caching community. Sounds a little selfish, and elitist, but its their deal, not mine.