uktim

You're more than welcome to apply your 'Five Cs' when hiding caches and choosing which ones to visit. The rest of us may have other criteria that we use when caching I thought those five factors covered everything. What other than container, contents, location, hide and 'everything else' is there? I'm sure that you never included "everything else" in your original list

You're more than welcome to apply your 'Five Cs' when hiding caches and choosing which ones to visit. The rest of us may have other criteria that we use when caching

Motivation is a very personal thing, we're all motivated by different things. Some people are motivated by a drive to find as many caches as possible, others strive for FTFs and some like to hide and receive "good" logs. We have no right to criticise someone elses motivations just because they don't "float our boat". Find 10/hide 1 is a perfactly valid "motivation" and it will be of interest for some cache seekers. I'm already watching what appears to be a developing series, maybe even a power trail, with interest to see where the next caches are placed. Good luck to them. I hope they find another 10 caches soon and place the next cache so that the interest is maintained

Are micros a sign of poor quality. The caches highlighted in this thread appear to be predominately micros sited alonga pleasant walk. Are they good or poor quality caches? I'd say good, our 6 year old daughter would probably disagree but is growing to understand that it is about much more than the size of the box.

The series is not the concern here, it is the concept of placing one cache for every ten found ~ I just doubt the wisdom of the idea and was asking how others felt. We don't bother doing a cache if we don't like the look of it, and don't see the point in clearing our local area of caches if they don't appeal to us. Perhaps that's why we have only got 2300 finds in just over 7 years when some of our friends have double that in a couple of years! For me it's not an issue. As long as the caches are good a "one for every ten" policy is as good as any other IMO. Bear in mind that these guys have an even lower find rate than your own

I suspect you're being too harsh here. I spotted these when they were published and they look to have the makings of a nice series forming a pleasant circular walk. Live and let live. We shouldn't expect everyone else to do it our way. If we don't like the look of a cache we don't have to visit it.

Did you see the person who did it? If so why didn't you take it up with them in person? If you didn't see who it was it's best not to make wild assumptions!

If you want to get involved in willy waving contests I haven't done the 3PC as you call it. I have however done a number of 50 plus mile single push challenges over rough terrain, 100 miles over 4 days self sufficient carrying all kit over 4 days and a significant number of single push 30 mile plus challenges. I've also used some of this to fundraise for charity. I know the routes up each of the 3 peaks and I wouldn't describe any of them as rough terrain. The trendily named 3 PC may have hold kudos in some circles but it's not hugely impressive IMO. I'm more likely to admire a good time on the Welsh 3000s which is solely about the walking and involves slightly more ascent over 24 plus miles much of it on less well trodden or maintained paths. Do it without outside support and you're doing even better. To be frank I'd be even more impressed if people used their imagination and put together their own challenge anywhere else rather than treading this over publicisd trail with the issues it causes.

Apart from the car and transport issues there is nothing there that you can't do in one hit in a single area. I would view the same mileage and ascent in a single push as a far greater challenge, cut the driving out and you could target a far worthier and more physically demanding 24 hour challenge. As a personal challenge anyone is welcome to do it, but it's not worthy of the respect that many expect for it IMHO.

OK I'll bite I fail to see the attraction. For a healthy fit adult this is no real physical challenge. It's just a peak bagging excercise which leaves you with little time to experience or contribute anything to the communities that surround the peaks.

The vast majority of people will still fall into one or other of these categories. Should the reviewers really be acting in such a hysterical manner? restricitng legitimate activities around schools and playgrounds will do nothing to alleviate the problems or peoples perceptions of it.

I live in hope that none of my geocoins will start racking up parking tickets or points for speeding

Is it really so strange? I'd estimate that roughly half of the geocoins we have sold have gone to people who don't cache. A good design will appeal to collectors every bit as much as it will appeal to cachers.

I think you probably need to be more relaxed about this. It's impossible to dictate what someone does with something after you sold it. It's not really a huge problem!

Brownsea Island is a visitor attraction, a campsite is merely a place to stay. It's a plot to pitch a tent and a toilet/shower block. Do you want everyone to come to the toilet with you

It will not, because £20 is not a reasonable charge for day visitors. And yet, one reviewer did consider that amount to be a reasonable fee to charge people to attend the event at brownsea island. How do we resolve this? In the example of camping events a fee of this size would be a rare occasion. Yet an event at a national trust site would nearly always. Events have been published that required people to spend that much. I'm happy that they do, I can choose whether or not to pay it. Why is camping under a different rule? The event is the event, travel and accomodation choices are a seperate issue. Would you hold an event on the bus to the venue or in your hotel room?

I tend to agree. Entrance fees or the need for specialist equipment are fine and you can make up your mind whether the tick is worth the cost BUT I'd say it's clear that there should be no ALRs such as sleeping in a tent or taking part in activities. Event organisers who seek to tag unecessary ALRs onto to basic requirement to sign the log are a large part of the problem IMO.

I find it hard to reconcile what you are saying in this post with your question "Should it not be possible to get people to take part in the event fully either by camping or by attending for a significant part of the day?" I believe there is a major difference between an event in a museum which is an interesting attraction, or a short event in a pub where the beer is good and an event where someone is expected to stop overnight at the same venue as the organiser. Why do you need them to camp at one venue rather than visiting an event on another premises then being free to stop where they like or even drive home?

If it's not about coercion why do you ask "Is it too much to ask that someone be required to actually camp overnight to be allowed to log the event." and "Should it not be possible to get people to take part in the event fully either by camping or by attending for a significant part of the day?" There's a huge difference between using a ferry as a form of transport to get to an event and someone trying to coerce you into stopping for longer than you want to. If an event is to be regarded as loggable you should only need to get to the log, sign it and move on. How many caches require you to hang around the cache for a prolonged period in order to satisfy the needs of the owner? If the event is good many will choose to stop but if others choose to move on then that's their choice you obviously haven't ticked the right boxes to retain their interest. Why let it bother you?

Never mind the money you can't serve meat, that's discrimination if you're a vegan

Thats a big can of worms you're opening Are they allowed to insist that you eat from their BBQ and pay for it or can you log your attendance without eating

It's great that you enjoy camping but why do feel that you have to coerce other people to join you?

Are you suggesting that I should use OS maps that I already own to follow footpaths so that I can upload GPS tracks in order to allow others to get mapping FOC. There appears to be a flaw in your reasoning On a more serious note the tracks that I uploaded years ago have not been incorporated into the OSM mapping so WTH should I waste any more time or effort marking trails? Well don't use OSM then!! Bit selfish if you ask me...but each to his own Look at it this way. If they'd used the stuff I had uploaded I might think it was worth the effort of uploading more.

Are you suggesting that I should use OS maps that I already own to follow footpaths so that I can upload GPS tracks in order to allow others to get mapping FOC. There appears to be a flaw in your reasoning On a more serious note the tracks that I uploaded years ago have not been incorporated into the OSM mapping so WTH should I waste any more time or effort marking trails?

I admire your optimism but if you want to venture off the public road OSM is hugely inadequate in our neck of the woods.