Jump to content

Dame Deco

+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dame Deco

  1. Funny story: When I was quite new to caching, I cleaned out a cemetery except for one cache. I looked and looked and looked--no go. A year and a half later, I had some extra time while in the area, so I thought--"let's give it another shot." This time I spotted it from the car while driving up to the spot--a bison tube as part of a wind chime! It was right out in the open for all to see. I asked the hider if it had always been that way--if it was there when I missed it, and he said, "yep." Of course, I'm also the one that dnf'ed a number of LPCs before discovering how they worked!
  2. I agree. I love caching with my dog, but I've got nothing to find within 10 miles of my house. I wish some park caches would get archived and new ones put in place so that I can cache while strolling through the woods with the Geohound. Does your average cache in the park really need to last 5 or 10 years?
  3. I show that I care about future finders when I say archive and replace (I know you weren't talking to me!).
  4. Maybe. Maybe not. If the point of the cache is the container size, then sure, go ahead: archive it and relist it with the new size. But if the point of the cache is the location, or the view, or the puzzle, or anything else other than the container size, then I don't think it makes sense to archive and relist the cache just because you replace the cache with one that is smaller or larger, crossing the boundary between two sizes. And if the point of the cache is the location, or the view, or the puzzle, or anything else other than the length of the hike, then I don't think it makes sense to archive and relist the cache just because a new road opens and the cache is now 500 yards from the trailhead instead of 5 miles, or because a road closes and the cache is now 5 miles from the trailhead instead of 500 yards. So if you take a cache that's a 5 hour hike, the cache write-up indicates this and years later a road is built to make it a P&G, you're saying this is the same cache?If the point of the cache is the 5-hour hike, then sure, archive the cache and relist it. But if the point of the cache is the waterfall, then I would not archive and relist the cache just because the abandoned logging road (that you used to have to walk along) has been improved and opened to the public, with convenient parking a quarter mile from the waterfall. It's still the same container. It's still the same location. It's still the same hide. More people will be able to enjoy the waterfall, and more people will be able to access the cache (hence, the lower terrain rating), but that's a function of the road improvements, not a function of the cache. And even some of us who don't care about the Jasmer Challenge (the original is on my ignore list) don't like seeing older cache listings churned. Do you archive and relist when an attribute changes (e.g., because there is now poison oak, or because the park now charges for parking)? Do you archive and relist when the CO changes his/her geocaching handle? After all, someone might have a challenge based on cache attributes, or based on cache owners' geocaching handles. But I find both of those examples just as absurd as archiving and relisting a cache simply because the terrain rating changed, when the terrain rating was never the point of the cache anyway. Baloney. None of the examples you listed are anywhere near an equivalent. If a hike changes to a drive, just archive and relist, you don't even have to go out and change the container. Just leave it in place and have people cache away if you like. As mentioned above, former finders can revisit this wonderful place you're praising. All the answers are getting more and more extreme and bordering on silly with defending "I don't care about your D/T grid." Come on, what we're talking about is caches with unusual combos and high ratings--a tiny percentage of all the caches out there. This isn't about "don't change a 2/2" for pete's sake. Have some respect for the folks who spent hours, money for gas, and like that, plus who enjoyed the hell out of the place and journey, etc., a year or more ago, and leave the rating as is or archive and replace. You're trying to make it sound like the person who got the 1/5 or 2/4.5 ONLY did it for the grid--that's probably not true. Why can't they enjoy the journey and all that in the exact same way you do, plus they enjoy the challenge of filling their grid, too? Why does it have to be either/or?
  5. That's a great point, actually. For some of those great views, etc.--an archived cache replaced with a new one gives those who found it already a reason to take the time to visit again.
  6. or the cache can be archived and replaced with a new one. Why not list that as a valid choice?
  7. And I know that a half star changes a rating to ruin a fizzy, but not everyone would change the rating for such a small change. Some might only change a rating if it changed by a full star, anyway. If it changes that much, just archive and make a new cache. Why is that such a terrible thing--why shrug and say "so what"? Just to make yourself feel powerful and smart? What I've loved about geocaching from the start is the sense of community that I've found through this hobby. I care about people who find my caches and what the stats mean to them--I wouldn't change a tricky rating after six months, I'd just archive and make a new cache.
  8. No--a fizzy should not be the last consideration if you are talking about people with finds a year of more old. If the terrain changes enough to change the rating, just archive the old cache and make a new one.
  9. What I can't do a thing about is a person who enjoys doing something like that and posting about it just because they can. So I don't try--I just make friends with other folks.
  10. Don't mess up folks stats who did the cache in good faith years ago. If it's changed that much, archive the old one and post a new cache in the same spot.
  11. Hmmm....? Could you...summarize that? Or at least edit so that so many words don't run together? ETA: Ah--that's for editing that! This is a discussion forum. People discuss things here. They express opinions. That's what forums are for.
  12. Who cares if LPCs are all about the numbers? Some people take pleasure in planning out a day and a route and seeing what they can do--they enjoy the PROCESS. What's wrong with that exactly? Some days that's what I want to do--some days I want to go do Earth caches, some days I want to hike in the woods, some days I want to drive a long way. What I love about geocaching is that I can choose whatever style suits my mood. I don't think LPCs really get in the way of other types anyway. They don't block ammo cans in the woods, do they? And as for this: Good! It gets folks out to see the waterfall and doesn't clutter up a beautiful area with folks searching through bushes and trees while non-cachers are trying to find a little peace. A 30 foot waterfall should be left alone to be...a waterfall. The ammo can cache can be down the trail a bit.
  13. There are plenty of reasons to use parking lots. Someone might be on a streak of trying for a cache a day and be a super busy person--they need a quick one. Someone might be having a busy or hard time this week, and finding a cache--even a LPG--releases some tension. Someone might be trying for a cache per county, and they don't have time to go for a hike. Someone might be from out of town and have no way to go find something better. Someone could be recuperating from an illness or they might not be very mobile, and the LPGs get them out of the house. Those all seem to be within the guidelines to me. That said, individual reviewers are 1) human beings, and 2) volunteers. That means that there will be variations within the system. Bottom line is, geocaching should be a fun, relaxing hobby. The best way to make it fun and relaxing is to ignore caches you don't like, hunt for ones you do, and place caches that will please you when folks find them. That's it really--it's not any more complicated than that.
  14. Cross the river to Louisville and do any puzzle, virtual, or multi by Show Me The Cache. Chimes of Freedom (5/27/2002) is awesome, and so are any of the others.
  15. Well, next time just look at the OP's finds. They have fewer than 100 in 4 years. Cache saturation is not the issue in this case.
  16. Never fear--there have been quite a few memorable, fun and interesting caches that play off the surrounding area in the last year or two. We've got some awesome new puzzles and multis, there are newer folks in this neck of the woods who are making some cool containers, and quite a few new EarthCaches have sprung up. Now I admit, a few of them are mine (not the cool containers, not my forte), but I'm not trying to brag or look for a pat on the back--I'm only one semi-new cacher--lots of others who have been caching less than 2 years like me have also added to the variety around here. We are also blessed with old-time cachers who make very fun and imaginative new hides, and frankly I can't imagine a friendlier community than the cachers around here who welcome all newbies with open arms. It might be true that we don't have all that many ammo cans in the woods filled with swag--but part of the problem is that in Portage County, at least, caches have to be within 10 feet of the trail. The OP has fewer than 20 finds since I started caching, and none of them are mine. I do appreciate the OP's--I have found four of theirs, and will probably go after another today or tomorrow. I appreciate caches with lots of swag--but I love other kinds of caching, too.
  17. When skibug9 and I found it on 3/17, it was definitely well camoed, out of sight, and not sitting next to a tree. I hate thinking about those 4 great old log books being lost! What a shame, we loved finding that one!
  18. The counties cached in also comes up in the "my profile" etc. that's linked to geocaching.com. The counties are tiny and in red, mind you, but if someone has cached in all the counties in a state, it can be there to see in anyone's profile using a geocaching.com service. mygeocachingprofile.com
  19. Since FTF isn't anything official anyway--the CO could give out 2 FTF's, one for the challenge done before and one for after the published date. Heck an experienced cacher could go for both!
  20. One thing COs could do is award 2 FTFs--one for those who completed it before it was published and one for those who completed it after.
  21. Perhaps I could have taken it to appeals, but it's doing alright as is. Thanks, everyone--I appreciate the support and advice.
  22. The reviewer note was a paragraph long. The reviewer explained why the change was being requested in a couple of sentences, then asked me to change it. All I meant is that I don't see how I could misinterpret the last sentence--"change it," essentially. I told you what my reviewer wrote. I can't tell it any plainer. I can't prove what the reviewer wrote--those comments were archived when the cache was published. I published my first comment in this thread in good faith--I simply told the OP what my reviewer told me. All that changed on my cache page was a reference to a puzzle as opposed to a multi--other then that, all I changed was the type.
  23. All my waypoints were revealed to all users--there was no calculating the next spot with info from the last stage, etc. I'm not sure I could have mistranslated "please make this an unknown/puzzle cache."
  • Create New...