blackdog7

I should clarify by saying I'm not so concerned with people getting hurt by lifting a lamp skirt alone, I'm concerned with where hides utilizing electrical equipment as containers might eventually lead. For example, I'm sure most have seen the hides that use the thin rectangular outlet covers as a container, often in a place where it might exist anyway. Well, I've encountered caches where I see these outlet covers that are not containers but seem to have been messed with, I'm assuming that at least some of the time a cacher has tried to get into these things thinking it was a cache. I used kids as an example but I could see where any eager cacher might open the wrong thing and end up hurting themselves. True enough that we assume the risk, and the topic of climbing or scuba caches was brought up, but I'm seeing these electrical equipment caches as slightly different. Plus I just want to understand the opinions of other cachers.

I'm on the forum trying to get an idea of how to proceed with this guy. The example I gave is the extreme case with him but he also has many caches hidden by attaching small screw-in hooks to trees, poles, posts etc. The guidelines state: "Geocache placements do not damage, deface or destroy public or private property. Caches are placed so that the surrounding environment, whether natural or human-made, is safe from intentional or unintentional harm. Property must not be damaged or altered to provide a hiding place, clue, or means of logging a find. Wildlife and the natural environment are not harmed in the pursuit of geocaching. Geocaches are placed so that plant and animal life are safe from both intentional and unintentional harm. In some regions geocaching activity may need to cease for portions of the year due to sensitivity of some species." While I interpret this to mean no drilling, I could see an argument that drilling will not kill the tree. I'm from Alabama, people in this area generally have a different opinion on how trees should be treated. Plus, the 'must not be damaged or altered to provide a hiding place' guideline is overlooked by many people when attaching containers, clues, etc to existing fenceposts or telephone poles. In this case, I'm thinking of those multi-caches where a clue or coordinates are found on a tag which has been attached to said pole. I don't see the problem when attaching to posts or poles, but with trees I do.

The guidelines state: 'Geocaches are placed so that plant and animal life are safe from both intentional and unintentional harm. In some regions geocaching activity may need to cease for portions of the year due to sensitivity of some species.' Still, I've found several caches, recently published caches too, that are attached to trees. Most recently, I found a Challenge cache where the posted coordinates took you to a tree that had a container screwed into it containing a tool. The tool was a magnet on a dowel rod. The difficulty was a 5 star because once you found the tool the only other clue you had was that the final was within 10 paces of the posted coords. The difficulty came from the fact that the final was a nano stuck inside a hole drilled into a tree. The hole was just large enough in diameter to allow the dowel rod to enter. The CO actually drilled a hole into the tree. I doubt he specifically stated this to the reviewer, though.

This is where the debate gets interesting though, at some point you're destroying the idea of the cache if you add too many clues.

It's the fake electrical boxes I'm talking about, I've never found one in a working box. I would have no problem, perhaps, if there were some way to distinguish it...maybe a geocache sticker or symbol, or even a description on the cache page. The inspiration for this post was a cache I found recently that was near some electrical boxes and while searching for it I noticed what appeared to be damage to some of the boxes as if someone were searching for something. It got me thinking about how often people have attempted to open working electrical boxes because they thought the cache might be there.

I delete these types of logs, after checking the final container and log to make sure there is no signature. I also email the cacher ahead of time to explain what I'm doing and why.

I've seen wires in several. Surely you see my point about encouraging children to manipulate something that could potentially cause electrocution, hence to statement about the electrical boxes.

I'm wondering what the thoughts are on the forum about potentially dangerous hiding spots. I've always thought lampskirt caches shouldn't be allowed because they could lead to electrocution. I'm seriously considering ignoring lamskirt caches altogether because of this, not to mention how incredibly boring they are but it never fails that I complete a difficult or lengthy challenge or Wherigo only to find the final hidden in a lampskirt. I've even encountered caches hidden inside electrical boxes. One I found in Pensacola, FL was a piece of conduit on a telephone pole with an electrical box attached to the top. It looked completely functional and required a screwdriver to open. Considering the fact that we're supposed to encourage children to geocache, I don't like the idea of teaching kids to go poking around electrical outlets and boxes. I also hate finding caches that are drilled into or nailed/screwed to living trees. This seems to defeat the whole 'green' idea of geocaching in my opinion. The guidelines are fairly lenient in my opinion. So what are the thoughts of the other forum members? Where do you draw the line?

I find it incredibly entertaining to read how sour some of you guys can be about the 'good-old-days' before this game was ruined by the youngins.

Definitely not. I find it to be a waste of time to worry about how other people log caches. I get plenty of useful feedback so nit-picking these so called 'lame' logs seems pointless.

I'm 31 in human years, 5 in geocaching years. While I'm noticing a trend toward younger cachers, I'm definitely the juvenile in most caching groups.

In my area there is a cacher who often will adopt caches like this that you've mentioned. Just the other day I logged a NA on a cache and within 20 minutes he called asking me to remove the NA so he could try to adopt the cache instead. He is responsible for several great hides that would've been lost to the archives otherwise. It's an option if you are lucky enough to have such as cacher nearby.

How long were the roads closed? Out of respect for my fellow Alabamians...I'll decline to answer.

I hope that image is large enough for everyone to see. Will you rebuild? Nah...we're relocating back to Florida on Sunday anyway.

Is it safe to assume you don't realize how hypocritical you sound here?

Obviously reasonable. I think I'm in agreement with you here, but to clarify: Do you not like Challenges based on the D/T grid?

I don't have a problem with someone modifying the game to fit their personal preference, up to the point that it negatively impacts the enjoyment for those that choose not to play the game in that manner. Agreed. Hopefully Groundspeak will step in if and when something like that ever happens.

I hope that image is large enough for everyone to see.

Full blown blizzard in central Alabama last night.

That was sarcasm. I have no doubt you're not a 'numbers guy'. To a certain extent, I wouldn't classify myself as a numbers cacher either. I don't have a problem with you having and expressing your own opinion, I'm just taking the opportunity to voice my disagreement. I do, however, think you guys are taking the stance that your version of cache finding and hiding is somehow superior to those around you. Like I said earlier, I think the beautiful thing about this game is that we can modify it to fit our personal preferences.

When I was introduced to geocaching, it was with a family member. The cache they took me to was a micro hidden in a small hollowed out pine cone....in the middle of the woods. Later that day we found another, this time a micro in a lamp skirt. Both blew my mind. Today I regard the pine cone cache as an all time favorite...and I hold great contempt for lamp skirts. To each hi/her own, I say.

Why not use the ignore feature? I don't like Traditional caches or lamposts, so I toggle off Traditionals and ignore lamposts when I encounter them. Your personal opinion. Again, ignore the cache. Removing Challenge caches would take away something from those who enjoy challenges. Perhaps a new icon would be a good idea. A blanket assumption. There are plenty of us who still write detailed and meaningful logs. Plenty of us also ignore power trails. The addition of Challenges in my area has inspired a great number of new Multi, Letterbox and Puzzle caches. You're probably correct here. Considering the popularity of both Power Trails and Challenges, I don't see Groundspeak removing them anytime soon.

[sarcasm]Doc's stories aren't worthy because he's obviously a 'numbers' guy and 'numbers' guys aren't real geocachers.[/sarcasm]

Why not just log a note and keep a spreadsheet of the notes you've logged. I mean, it's only about the find for you guys, not the 'numbers' so you shouldn't need the smiley...correct?

No. The oft quoted "you can play the game how you want to play it" might be a nice sentiment but the fact is that there are a lot of ways people are playing the game that have a negative impact on the enjoyment of how others want to play the game. When someone creates a power trail of 80 challenge caches, that power trail is saturating an area to the point that it's impossible to play the game in that area without completing those challenges. If a few puzzle cache fanatics try to one up each other by creating the largest number of difficult puzzle caches it not only impacts that have no interest in doing puzzle caches, but it forces a cache hider to solve those puzzles (or more likely get the solutions using a PAF network) just so they know whether know whether or not the spot they picked for their clever traditional doesn't have proximity issues. Every nano cache stuck on a sign in the parking lot of a trail head blocks someone from creating a larger cache, possibly with a scenic overlook, up to 528' up the trail from the parking lot. When someone writes "we can all play the game how we want" it sometimes means "I'll play the game the way want". I long as it makes me happy I don't care if how i play the game reduces the enjoyment of others. Sounds to me like your method of playing the game could reduce the enjoyment that I receive from it, but you've been a member since early 2007 and I've only been a member since late 2009, so your enjoyment outranks mine? EDIT: 'reduces' changed to 'could reduce'