Quossum
+Premium Members-
Posts
172 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Quossum
-
Wow! Good work! I am one who gladly releases bugs and even smaller / inexpensive coins in their "real" form, but fancier coins go in proxy form right from the beginning. I tend to favor little tabs of engraved metal attached to a suitable toy/object as hitchhiker. These that you've put together are very nicely done. Great job and a very kind offer; I bet you'll get some eager takers! --Q
-
I think you may be on to something! In fact, maybe these bug owners should just skip the whole cache thing and accost random strangers on crowded urban sidewalks, assessing their character in an instant's wide-eyed stare, tucking a travel bug into their purses or briefcases with an intense, "Read it! You'll figure it out!" then melting away into the mass of humanity before the authorities arrive. Or, for those who like nature, drop a travel bug on a hiking trail and hope someone with good intentions picks it up. Surely the rate of losing them will be no worse than it is right now!
-
I thought it was elegant because it *didn't* require each cacher to do anything...but allowed those of us cachers who already DO, to have an effect. Case in point: As it is right now, many cachers put in their log for the cache: "No travelers present" or "No TB's today." That alone is helpful and wouldn't have to change with The Blorenges plan. As it is right now, those of us who care about travelers (a much smaller number) will, when logging the cache, go to the pages of the bugs listed in its inventory and type "Write Note" logs that read, "Sorry, your bug was not in Cache XYZ." That didn't require writing down TB numbers or anything like that. (I guess if there were dozens of bugs in there to sort out, maybe, but that's pretty darn rare.) It seems to me that the ONLY difference is that, under the Blorenges plan, after X many such reports on the TB itself, that bug would be "ghosted" (though I like the idea of red print better than faded for bugs that have been reported missing) and / or eventually (amount of time could be a topic of discussion--three months might be too short, but five? Six?) automatically be listed as "missing" and thus disappear from the cache's inventory. No "extra" action required of anyone who didn't care to do it, and it doesn't involve any alteration in logging the cache itself. But something would eventually happen to inaccurate cache inventory thanks to the actions of those who take the extra effort. I see it as not much different from posting a NM log: some cachers will, some cachers won't, but it does give information to future seekers. I agree that nothing "mandatory" about bug maintenance should be added. You're right; many cachers aren't interested in that part of the game. Now pass me the bourbon! --Q
-
Sorry! I was just trying to point out that this oft-brought-up topic has been discussed to death and that "official" procedures are underway to come up with a solution. I totally agree; I love this forum (because I love travelers), but every other thread is "Why aren't bugs in the cache where the inventory says they are?" You (and other regulars) do your darnedest to explain, and personally I was thrilled when I saw the Blorenges suggestion so got a little enthusiastic. Maybe one of the stickied topics in this forum should be something like, "HELP! Cache inventory lists bugs not there!" Then the kvetching / solutionizing could take place in that thread, and new threads directed to it. Just a thought; sorry if I did something wrong. --Q
-
Just wanted to throw in a vote of support for this solution. The time ranges and the number of visitors who have to mark the item missing could be discussed, but really, it would be very nice to clean out the inventories of marvelous caches like this one: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=15b66e5e-d89c-4a4a-bde1-c993d2275593 Its inventory includes travelers that have been repeatedly, consistently reported missing, both on the cache page and the bugs' pages, since 2007, 2005, and 2009. Thanks for considering this idea! --Q
-
There were many logs on one of our hides once that a geocoin was missing. Sometimes I'll email the TO and let them know that when I do maintenance, I'll check. Turned out the coin that was missed by many was without a sleeve and was stuck to the ammo can lid (with who knows what) and it wasn't missing afterall, just overlooked. While that is possible, I would imagine that a situation like that (traveler IS in the cache, but overlooked several times) is somewhat rare. How about one like this: http://www.geocaching.com/track/details.aspx?guid=dfa0cce0-1621-4290-82e4-478f40a9494d This bug hasn't been in the listed cache since 2005 (and this is a cache with over 300 visits). A few of the other bugs in it are in a similar state of being missing for years and years and years. I like The Blorenges well-considered possible solution, discussed here: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=284690 Don't know that it will happen, but it is one of the most rational plans I've heard of. --Q
-
I've found several throwdowns in my time (never placed one, for all the reasons stated), but here are examples of two where the throwdown substantially changed (for the worse) the caching experience the CO intended: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=7a22ff29-67ab-4335-b402-e0d1207cb0b3 Sweetwater Gentleman. The throwdown was a clear plastic film can in a tree. That didn't match the description at all, so we kept looking, with some trepidation...yep, the actual cache (a small lock and lock with a travel bug inside, so yes, much better than the throwndown) was found in the ancient, rather disturbing but more challenging...er...actual toilet area. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=2074f32a-5c03-40b6-b4d7-39f7945cbb53 Entomophobia. The throwdown was a lock-n-lock in plain sight. The original was a lock-n-lock in a hollow on the end of a string, so one had to spot the (camo color) string and reel it up. At least in this case a similar container was left, but the original one was cooler and more of a challenge. There have been others, but these two spring to my mind. The cachers who left these throwdowns weren't doing anyone a favor but themselves. They couldn't find (or in the case of the first one, perhaps didn't WANNA find) the actual cache, so they just left their own. --Q
-
I feel your pain. When we go on vacation we like to do some "Bug Hunts" beforehand and take a bunch of travelers with us to drop off while on the road. Some tips: Run a Pocket Query and select the filter for "contains inventory" (not sure if that's the exact wording) Once you have the list, take a look at the most recent logs. If it's one of "those" caches, you're almost sure to see a log like, "No TB present." On the other hand you might see a log like, "Dropped off TB." Eliminate the caches where the bugs have obviously disappeared. Using this method, we have been very successful at harvesting a handful of travelers to accompany us on vacation. We love moving bugs and have often planned expeditions around their goals. That said, I agree that there needs to be some sort of method to help clean out these "Ghost Travelers" junking up cache inventories, sometimes for years and years with no response from the CO or the bug owner, either of whom can mark it missing. Well thought-out and reasonable solutions have been suggested, but thus far none have been implemented. Good luck! --Q
-
What adventures are you having with August Challenge?
Quossum replied to disneyfan1313's topic in General geocaching topics
Great thread! We're in a good position of being surrounded by caches of all kinds in our home radius, since usually when we go out caching we have a "destination" and so haven't done so many around home. This challenge is encouraging us to clear a bit of our home radius. So far, so good, though the really challenging part will be the last two weeks when I'm back at school and we'll *both* be tired from work in the evenings. Our diciest moment was the evening of the 9th, when we went out to dinner and then tried to do some urban caching in the area. After a couple of DNF's and having to avoid a couple of sites due to too many lurking muggles, we finally made one. Caching in our evening wear was a fun experience. Though we have picked up a few of those notorious skirt-lifter micros, we really prefer larger caches or at least more challenging micros, so we've tried to home in on a few of those. The folks came up to cache with us yesterday and we picked up an amazing hidden cemetery / historical marker regular cache plus a few micros. I've launched two travelers this month and wouldn't mind sending out a few more. Almost halfway there! --Q -
I got one for my birthday, too! 8-8. I visited an ammo can and launched a new trackable to boot. But now my precious birthday souvenir is just one of (soon to be) 31. D'oh.
-
+1 I enjoy clever micros and nanos and have had many great hunts for them. They can be a fun challenge in a very different way than an (also very fulfilling) hike to an ammo can. But I'm totally down with people being honest about the size! Isn't the rule of thumb that a "Small" should be able to hold small swag? I think if a small travel bug (dog tag plus small hitchhiker, not necessarily a beanie baby or railroad spike) can't fit, it shouldn't be called a Small. Around here some people list soda tubes and key hiders as smalls. --Q
-
I recently learned of a practice some people use where they visit and gather information for a Virtual or Earthcache, but wait to log it until a later date where the find could be more useful, like filling in a blank date on the calendar. I find this no different than logging a physical cache on a different date than the actual find. Cheesy, lame, dishonest. Oh, yeah! So true! Oh--ahem--that's right...I did that in a way. I *really* wanted Rim to Rim to be my 1000 milestone cache, so I waited a bit to send in my answers to the cerebral portion of the cache (having already done the physical part). That's the only cache I've ever logged even vaguely "out of order," and yeah...pure vanity / "oh the coolness of it!" on my part. I guess that is a bit cheesy! *sigh* Guess I shouldn't be so judge-y. But hey, with this August souvenir streak, *I'll* know that I did it by actually going out and finding a cache each day, no fudging, and that gives me satisfaction. I...suppose....if someone finds satisfaction in *not* completing the streak that way but still having the souvenirs....or from logging finds on different dates so as to not have their souvenir page "cluttered"...then I guess each person has to decide where to draw their "Nah, that's *too* lame!" line. --Q
-
My hubby and I are another couple of "non-newbies" (1000 finds, three years) who are going for the August streak We've had a lot of fun so far planning our strategy and going out each day, and we know some days will be a challenge if we come home tired from work, and on nights when we go to our dog Agility classes and will have to pick one up while we're out in the area of class, but that's all part of the challenge. I posted a plain picture for my first two, but starting with Day Three I had an idea to post a weather app photo for my picture, thus I'll also have a streak of gallery photos showing the daily weather for that month of caching. (Okay, so it's South Texas. They'll probably all be identical 90+ degree days one after another! ) What the OP is doing is perfectly legit. All the cheesy ways of "cheating," like making the finds all one day and logging them with different dates, stc., are...well, cheesy and sort of what's-the-point. How can anyone get a sense of satisfaction from that? I was kind of excited about this whole August streak souvenirs things, and when I came to the forums was utterly taken aback by all the vitriol surrounding it. But hey, everyone has the right to their opinions, and there were some points made I hadn't thought of, so to each their own. A couple of years ago I did a July streak, just as a challenge to myself. It was fun and I enjoyed it. This one is the same, with a little extra reward!. I think it's great fun, and I thank GS for the incentive! --Q
-
Or if you pick up travelers while on vacation, hoping to get out-of-state / country bugs and give them lots of miles! You might not be able to check the bug's goal until you are back home (or at least to a hotel with wifi, or back in cell range, or whatever), and by that time you've taken the bug in the wrong direction. Of course all of that is part of the fun of moving and having travelers, anyway! --Q
-
When you have several bugs to send out, a "race" is always fun. Here's a link to a couple of races we've done, one from a couple of years ago: http://www.geocaching.com/track/details.aspx?id=3465909 (two of four still going strong), and one from a race we just started with our most recent vacation: http://www.geocaching.com/track/details.aspx?id=3748029 With a race, you can set the goals to whatever you like: visit the most states / countries, rack up the most miles, etc. Link to the other racers on everyone's page so that people can check on the progress of the racers. I saw a really fun one where each member of the family had dropped off a tag in their honor while on vacation, and the goal was for the tags to race to see which would make it back to their hometown first. When you have several to drop off, drop them in various places, so that it would be unlikely the same cacher could pick them all up in one trip: less of a chance that a newbie who never caches again will grab them all. Be sure to read the Longevity thread about tips to help your bug last longer. The hitchhiker shouldn't be *too* cute but should be interesting enough. The cable really is better than the beaded keychain (which we have used after filling the latch with gorilla glue, it still, the cable is better). Totally echo the sentiment of others who've said you can't get too attached to these things or send out something with significant emotional baggage attached to it; that way lies heartbreak, because they will inevitably disappear. Better to get a LOT of them out there and just enjoy the ones that do travel! (On the other hand, my very first traveler, a Geocoin and not just a proxy but the actual coin) is still moving along despite months and once a year at a time of inaction. http://www.geocaching.com/track/details.aspx?id=2679029&page=1 ) Have fun and enjoy your bugs' travels! --Q
-
I sometimes use the goals of whatever travelers I have in my possession to plan our next caching trip. If the goal absolutely doesn't fit what I can/want to do in the reasonable future, yeah, I'll just drop it somewhere hopefully with a chance of being in the right direction. So, yes, it's worthwhile to have a fun goal for a bug. Some cachers will try to meet it, others won't. However, if you're going to have a goal, I highly recommend stating that in some way on the bug itself--a laminated card attached to its tag or whathaveyou. It makes it so much easier, if there's a specific goal, to see before you take the bug. Once I grabbed a bug while on vacation. Later, when I got a chance to see its page, I saw that it had been heading in the right direction....and I had just taken it in the exact opposite direction. Oopsie...but I had no way of knowing that in the field. Good luck! I love travelers, both placing and moving them. It's a fun part of the game. --Q
-
You may take a look at my gallery as well; it has many shots of us along with my parents, sisters, and nephews, and faithful Geo-dogs on the trail. But here's one of my favorites, which I couldn't post in my gallery for spoiler reasons. Good luck with the project! Can't wait to see the final result some time. --Q
-
Flame is on the move again! It *is* possible to escape the hoard! Thanks for sending her back out into the world. --Q
-
Sadly, this same notorious collector managed to nab one of mine, too: http://www.geocaching.com/track/details.aspx?id=3465909 She was winning the race and everything! Really unfortunate, as the dog whose traveler this was, Flame, passed away and we were hoping her coin could make its way (eventually) back to us, where I would put it with the box containing her ashes. I also wouldn't have minded if it had just traveled on and on. But for it to end up this way...*sigh.* Still, the whole law of travelers is not to get too attached to them. Right now, the other three racers of my Geo-dog coins are *all* being held by various cachers, and only one of them seems to still be on the move. That's just life with travelers, and I'm not sweating it too much. Just melancholy at such an ignominious end, and hopeful that Flame just might be one of the rare escapees from the hoard someday. --Q
-
(Fictional) books which include Geocaching
Quossum replied to NYPaddleCacher's topic in General geocaching topics
North of Beautiful is a novel with a strong Geocaching subplot. An excellent book. --Q -
I did, too. The details need to be worked out, but I think it's a great idea. --Q
-
What makes an enjoyable cache?
Quossum replied to FolsomNatural's topic in General geocaching topics
Caches that are in the woods, along a hike, or lead to a great view are always appreciated. Regular-sized caches where one will fit. I do love micros and nanos, but micros-in-the-woods are rarely fun. (Though they can be.) Caches with cool and interesting containers: logs, branches, rocks, "floaters" and other types of figure-out-how-to-get-to-it tricks. Bolts, lightbulbs, switch plates--getting creative with urban caches. Taking "just another LPC" to another level by doing something fun with it. I found one skirt-lifter where the container was a bone, another where you opened the pill bottle to see a piece of paper that read, "Not here! Look higher!" (There was a nano stuck far up on the lamp post.) Of course, probably the best cache of all is when the cache is out in the woods AND the container shows a lot of work and creativity... --Q -
I signed the log...but should it have been a DNF?
Quossum replied to Quossum's topic in General geocaching topics
To EmmaGX: I think you should log a find and see what happens. I had a very similar situation for this cache: there was a container with a log, but pretty far off from the coordinates and not as described in the write-up. Since my log, the CO seems to have confirmed that the "strange" cache is actually the cache; they've even changed the coordinates. By the same token, here's a cache where we found a throw-down and, because its nature didn't match the other logs, kept on looking until we found the real cache. If you've given it a good honest look, I think you have to assume that what you found was the cache until notified otherwise. With the cache you found, the CO hasn't been on since Nov. 2010, so perhaps another cacher took matters into their own hands? To all: Caching morality is so funny. I posted about this "grey area" where I felt comfortable logging a find on a log-with-no-cache, and not everyone agreed with me. Yet, in another thread, people are discussing logging finds on puzzles and multis where the finder didn't do the puzzle or solve the multi...and that's something that I would not feel comfortable doing. I have no problem with others doing it, and certainly wouldn't delete such finds if I had published a puzzle or multi, just commenting. It's interesting! --Q -
I signed the log...but should it have been a DNF?
Quossum replied to Quossum's topic in General geocaching topics
Thank you for all the thoughtful replies. I have puritan leanings, which is why I questioned my own actions in the first place, but I just felt so darn silly after returning to that one cache site to re-find the thing, with its log already signed... Still, if the situation does come up again, I know I'll have your comments in mind. I have to add that I'm quite sure none of these were throw-downs, but had logs that went back a while. I've encountered throw-downs, and I hate them! And, to answer the question of another poster in this thread: No, you shouldn't log a find for a cache which you could not retrieve due to muggle activity. Either just reach in and get it (most muggles don't care or really aren't noticing you in the least) or come back later for it. Log a DNF or, if it makes you feel better, a note stating why you couldn't get it. Just my opinion on that one. Again, thanks for the discourse. Always great to hear the thoughts of fellow cachers on these "iffy" situations. --Q -
I'd like to see some opinions on this caching "grey area" I've encountered now several times. We all know that it's wrong, wrong, wrong to log a find on a missing cache. At the risk of slipping to the Dark Side, being mocked in the Found It=Didn't Find It thread, and because it's just plain evil, I would never log a Found It for a dangling string, lid found on the ground, "trying," or locating the spot where I'm sure the cache *was.* My way of playing also involves climbing the tree for tree-climb caches, logging my DNF's, and solving the puzzle for Mystery caches. However...what about when the cache is missing...but the log isn't? I would think that would be a rare situation, but I have now encountered it four times, and each time I was a bit torn as to how to handle it. Case 1: Cache was a fun, themed cache. Found every item that belonged in it, including the themed swag, the logbook and "This is a Geocache" insert, and random toys, all in a pile a bit off of GZ. It was obvious that the container (no doubt a nice ammo can) had been muggled, but the contents unceremoniously dumped. A relatively new cacher at the time, I signed the log, gathered the stuff (the log book went back for years and was a pleasure to read), posted a NM, and met with the CO later to give him all the items. I counted this as a find, and soon the CO had it up and running again. I felt a little weird about it, though. Case 2: Looking for a micro, found the baggie with log, but no container. We signed the log, placed it in a hiding spot at GZ, then I posted a NM mentioning the missing container, and didn't log a find. However, the errant container was found by a later cacher and put back with the log. When I was in the area next, the whole group went back to the spot, straight back to GZ, found it again (this time with the log *in* the film canister), in the exact same spot. Then I, uh...well, there wasn't anything else to do. We'd already signed the log. I posted a Found It, but now felt rather silly, the only difference from the previous search being that, well, there was a film canister this time. The feeling of this experience led me to the next two... Case 3: Found log in baggie at GZ, no container. Signed log, posted NM, logged Found. CO replaced container and moved it slightly. I guess I could have gone back and looked again on this one... Case 4: Out of state trip. Found the log in a plastic baggie, carefully hidden under a pile of sticks (obviously not a just-ravaged-by-muggles case). Signed (left a pathtag in the baggie), counted as Found, posted NM. This one, not much chance I would be back to re-find a replaced container. So...what are your thoughts? I did sign the log, so should it be a find? Should I have declined to mark these as Found because they weren't found in the intended condition, or is it the log that "makes" the cache? (I'll not touch the issue of flat hides where the log's baggie IS the cache container!) Mind you, I'm not worrying excessively over this issue and feel comfortable enough with my moral compass, but just curious about others' views. Thank you, --Q