RuffRidr

The cache in question: Moccasin GAP For the record I don't agree with the reasoning behind the hider removing the cache either. Regardless it HAS happened, and to say that the explosion of micros doesn't have an effect on the sport is a fallacy. This is not the only hider in this area to give up. I know of two other cachers here (one of which found some of the most stunning areas around) who have quit much for the same reason. --RuffRidr

Hide away! I don't think there's anyone that would really have a problem with these. To respond to the original post. I too, have about 10 ideas going. Some are interesting hides, some are interesting stories about local spots. For the most part I don't have a location yet, and that's the main sticking point. Scouting out spots takes a lot of time, and that seems like a commodity I don't have a lot of right now. --RuffRidr

LOL! Right, remember there is no such thing as a bad lightbulb. If you don't like it, just use your ignore feature. --RuffRidr

What is the point? That is just absurd. No doubt. What's next? A piece of rice that you are expected to sign your name to? --RuffRidr

So you think I lied about this? And then you go on to suggest that I created the log to create controversy. I'm not sure what I have done to illicit this accusation. Sure, I've been vocal about something that I think is a growing concern in this sport. But do I hate micros? NO! In fact some of my favorite caches are micro caches. Believe me, some of the micro hiders around here are very creative. What I hate is crappy caches. Caches that lazy cachers put about less than a minutes worth of effort into. These seem to be spreading like wildfire. Thanks to these types of caches, I have one less cache that I like to hunt in my area. Oh, but they're not hurting anyone, are they? --RuffRidr Edited to prevent me from getting a warning.

On the arkgeocaching.org board we have a thread called "Dust-Offs" where we list the caches that haven't been found in the longest time. The only way that I know of finding these is by getting all of the caches in the state into GSAK, and then sorting by Last Found Date. This seems like a perfectly legitimate use to me. --RuffRidr

TPTB don't want you using this data to start up a competing site. Therefore you can only have smaller portions of the data. It does kinda make it a pain to cache on a longer roadtrip. The last one of those I did, I had to spend about two hours finding the overlap zones, and then it required 5 different pocket queries. Anyway, here's a tip I ran across for downloading all of the caches in a state. Set your first pocket query to the state you choose. Now set the date parameters to Jan. 2000 as the beginning date, and pick a later date for the end date. Save your query and look at it in the preview. If you have 500 caches you will have to adjust your second date to an earlier date. Under 500 and you will need to adjust it to a later time. Keep adjusting until you have the right date for just under 500 caches. Now in your second query, start with the date you ended with in your first query and move your end date until you have 500 more caches. See where this is going. After a couple pocket queries you will have all the caches in your state without having to mess with overlapping areas. Note that this will not work well in states with over 2500 caches. Hope this helps, --RuffRidr

Small transparent .gifs (or any externally hosted image for that matter) can also be used to track the IP address of every machine that visits your profile page. --RuffRidr

Who says the splattering of micros all over creation doesn't effect traditionals? The archive note of a cache near here: I picked up the cache this morning. Not much activity lately. The local trend of micro caches that the family sedan can drive to and 'Easter Egg hunt' has killed the sport in my opinion. Hiking and scenery has been replaced with adults searching for a film canister in a parking lot. How sad. Sad, indeed. --RuffRidr

I'd like to see the maker of GSAK get together with Groundspeak and come up with a way to enter all of the logs in GSAK. Then you click submit, and it sends all of the logs in one batch. I think if you could get a lot of the GSAK users to do this, you would cut down on the amount of traffic significantly. Also, it'd be nice for cache runs. You could enter in your logs between caches, instead of waiting until you got home. Oh, I also like the Premium Member priority idea. --RuffRidr

That's certainly helpful. No doubt. The earlier post smacked of elitism. I guess it really is who you know, and not what you know. --RuffRidr

I say we just get rid of the forums all together. No more problems. --RuffRidr

Do you two dislike ChurchCampDave's idea, Markwell's idea, or both? --RuffRidr

I haven't seen one person on any of these threads that has said that they want micros banned. Not one. I don't think any one is even asking for any kind of added restrictions to be placed on them. So I don't see any reason why someone should place a cache out of fear of this happening. In my opinion, their fear is unfounded. There could be a bit of this happening. I don't see how it have any effect, though, since the posters are unlikely to ever see these caches. Same as #2. First, it wouldn't have any effect on the poster if they didn't see them. Second, and I think this is important, no one is really against micros. I repeat, it is not the micros that people have a problem with. It is ILL THOUGHT OUT micros. You know, the ones with no redeeming value. The ones that sole reason of existence is to stroke the ego of the hider and give him one more hide to pad his numbers. So, maybe it will boost the micro numbers. If they're good ones, then great! --RuffRidr

Why stop there? I bet you could fit 2 or 3 caches into that parking lot. And what about the interstate on the way to that new city. I bet you could place a cache at every mile marker along the way. Imagine the number of caches you could get then. Maybe if you get right on it, YOU can hide a series like this in your area. Ya, then you get to raise your hide numbers as well. Everybody in your area will love you for these "gifts". --RuffRidr

I think cammoed is just a bastardization of camo and ammo, and therefore is right out. I'd accept camoed, camo'd, or camo'ed. Camoued just doesn't look right, however it is probably most correct. --RuffRidr

Hmmm. Good point. I guess in my theoretical hide, I'd hide the stickers really well. You know how the there is usually about a 1 inch gap on the poles? I'd hide it up in there, so you can only see it with the aid of mirror or something. That way it is out of the elements, and not able to be muggled. See, I can play this stupid what-if game all day too. Also, I don't have to worry about the ramifications here. Most of the people around here are considerate and put a lot of thought into their caches. There are very few lightpole/guardrail type of caches around here. The ones that are here were placed quite a while ago when those hides were still novel. Therefore, I'd have no need to place a cache like this. Have a good day! --RuffRidr

What do you mean by being successful? If a multicache like that were to be setup, I doubt the intention would be for anyone to ever actually find all of the stages of the darn thing. So you'd be successful in just placing it. As for being successful in covering parking lots, that actually would not be that hard. Place the last cache first. Get a sheet (or 10) of Avery labels. Write the coord on a sticker, go find a lamppost, place sticker. Rinse and repeat for the next 100 or so parking lots. You could easily cover all of the major parking lots in your area within a few hours or so. Maybe, someone will find a parking lot you didn't include. Good for them. They successfully placed a lamppost cache. But you were successful in the fact that they didn't go Cacheville on your town. Its all academic anyway. At least I don't plan on hiding a cache like this. --RuffRidr

Are you sure about that? I'm pretty sure you're supposed to give every stage. Maybe an approver will jump in here. --RuffRidr

The original topic was starting to get way off track and was degenerating rapidly. Anyway, he reopened it just for you. Time to throw in your $.02. --RuffRidr

Large, non-sequential, unmarked bills please. Or gold bars if you don't have any of those. Hmm, I'd also like to see winning lottery tickets, ultra-rare baseball cards, and first edition books by famous authors. Oh, and the hide better not be lame!! --RuffRidr

A mystery would not work, you are right. A micro would also not really work, because you are just creating the same type of caches you are trying to get rid of. A multicache is the solution. The legs of the multicache would reserve the spot so others could not use it. You can make the multicache so annoying that no one would ever want to hunt it, ie. 100 (or more) legs, all in crappy locations. Hell, you could even call in the world's lamest multicache. Problem solved. Done deal. --RuffRidr

I think your original log was OK, although not the nicest. Your second log was great. I definitely wouldn't change it if asked. I don't see a problem with telling people what you think about their caches. I do think people on here are too thin skinned and shouldn't take everything so personally. Use remarks like that as motivation to make your next hide better, jeez. --RuffRidr

My point is that some caches do suck, are lame, and crappy. Some people are going to extreme lengths to prove otherwise. I can't wait to see how a turd covered film cannister will likewise be touted as a cache worthy of hunting. Why is everyone so afraid of admitting that some caches have no redeeming value? This is almost absurd. --RuffRidr

I know this is going off track, since the original thread was about Walmart micros, and it has now morphed into a "lame" cache debate, but what the hell. So the reasoning by most here is that there is no such thing as a "crappy" cache. Somebody, somewhere might find it interesting. So, if I take a dump, and hide a film container in it, could that be considered a "crappy" cache. Maybe a group of you could all come and search for it. That would "make it fun". I know this is in the extreme, but not all caches are fun, by any reasoning. And even if one person does somehow find some of these "crappy" ones fun, I see no reason to celebrate it, because that hider has probably wasted the time of another 40 finders who thought "why bother". We don't need to go and ban any cache types, cache hides, or methods. But can't we strive to make the caching in our areas the very best that it can be? --RuffRidr