Kyle891

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying everyone with high numbers have lost their passion in aching and only do it for the numbers etc. I have a number of caching friends who have found loads and who have placed loads of caches. What I'm saying the issue for me is when the quality of placement and cache are overlooked just to gain another digit. Sure everyone plays and enjoys the game differently and in different ways, I have no issues with that. I'm more surprised that there are virtually no standards for caches being placed. basically as long as it has some form of log and it's in a location then it counts... Maybe I'm just being picky but I'd sure like to see a better standard of quality drawn up.

Hi all. I live in New Zealand and over the 3 years I've been actively caching something has come to my attention and I'm curious to know whether it's a world wide issue or if it's localized to these shores. The biggest, "Problem"(IMO)is the fact the, "Game"(Geocaching) has become very much a numbers game where he who holds the biggest numbers rules. To me geocaching is more about the adventure of going to get a new cache, the places it takes me, the things I have to do, sometimes the people I meet and even the photos I can never replace. It's the stories of epic adventure that make my day. It seems some have either been doing it for so long they have lost their passion for the game and it's become all about finding the most or hiding the most caches. I have no issue with the race to be in front by numbers but what bothers me is when the numbers become more important than the experience. Where you would once have placed a cammoed bucket full of SWAG and a giant log book for people to share their stories, you now place a little mint container with nothing more than a few scrap pieces of paper stuck together as a log book. And just to say you hid one more cache than the last person. Is it like this all over the world? The sad part is if there is someone trying to put together a story cache, a puzzle or something fun and enjoyable in an area then that space has only a matter of days or weeks before the area gets bombarded with silly little tins. I know an area can be held by publishers for this purpose but it's not enough in my opinion. Surely there could be a way to regulate just how many caches a single person can place? How many caches can one single person actively maintain? The last problem I have, before I bore you all to death... We like to think we all practise Cash In Trash Out (CITO) but when I hear of people having over 300 caches to look after, I have to wonder just how many caches are given up as lost or taken without a single look from the owner being had. I know for a fact one person in particular archives their cache if it receives more than 3 "Did not find". How many caches have been given up and are still lying there... a plastic or metal container left for the elements to decompose aka litter. I think there are ways of improving the game to make it a far more enjoyable experience for all. What do you think?

I was recently given the reason why WackyB is no longer in operation. http://cachetrasher.blogspot.com/ All the information you need to know is in this blog. I will reserve my thoughts on this for personal well being.

Title is meant to be WachyB! I started geocaching in August 2010 and fell in love with the sport as we all have at some point in our caching history. I have been wowed at some amazing and well setup caches, multi's and puzzles along with some absolutely out of this world scenery and views. In the 250 odd caches I've found there have been one cacher who, without doubt, has come up with the most enjoyable caches I have found so far. WackyB is his name or Andy to some. Those of you who know the name know exactly what I'm talking about. For those of you who don't know of him, my suggestion is to get onto the site and search the nearest one of his caches to you! I've noticed he no longer maintains these treasures and seems to have fallen off the face of the earth with little communication about his disappearance. His profile reckons he last logged in at the end of 2010... Since then the vast majority of his caches have either gone missing, there are parts missing, needs new logs or just general cache maintenance. I'm sure most will agree it's an absolute shame to let these go to waste when it would be so simple if a few of us who have done these caches and know what goes where and what they should look like could possibly keep these caches going before they all fall to pieces and get lost to the archives. Would there be a few willing to do this? (including myself) If you are, flick me an email Regards, Kyle891

So a few weeks ago a cache was published and as it turns out it made clever use of a dummy container. Now I see the dummy has been removed so I contacted the cache owner to ask why. Apparently a few people failed to see the sense of humour behind the idea of putting this little spin on what is now an average traditional cache. The hint was,"It's NOT under the rock." At GZ there was a suspicious looking rock so naturally you turn it over and sure enough there's a container. "That was easy..." Open it up to find a note saying something along the lines of,"Told you it's NOT under the rock... but you're close." A few meters away is where the true cache is hidden. So now after a couple of silly comments in the logs the cache owner has removed the dummy in order to try keep everyone happy. To me, I liked the idea and it put a new spin on things but at the same time it got me thinking. Are there any rules on "Dummy" containers and what are other people's opinions on them???

This is interesting because I have the same question. I understand that my WP(if I hide something) are subject to the proximity rule of 161m but does that same rule apply for the WP of my multi? If it does then my plan is a little buggered