RuffRidr

I expect that's true - it's much easier to instill YOUR "what it's all about" beliefs and practices in newbies that haven't experienced other fun styles of geocaching. With cheap shots like that, I can't imagine why they wouldn't want to cache with you. --RuffRidr

OK, I've got a solution to our problems. We need to get together and create one large worldwide multi that encompasses every Walmart parking lot in the world. Then we can make a cache page that no one could possibly ever hunt, but would make it so no Walmart parking lot could be used again. Edit: for the humor impaired, this post is in jest. Carry on. --RuffRidr

If you don't like to read CR's posts - you don't have to. You can filter them out. If you see a thread he started, you probably shouldn't open it. Just keep "driving". If you see a thread that might be controversial - click on the number of posters, this will show you who has posted in the thread. If CR, or some other person that has opinions you don't like, has posted - just browse on. If you don't like em, don't read em. sd I have nothing against CR or his posts. I think he does an excellent job and conveying his point of view and his debating skills are top notch. I just happen to feel this particular thread is unnecessary. Then use your built-in ignore feature (ie. stop posting to it). --RuffRidr

Amen! I'm sick of the "use the ignore feature" arguement. In a ton of cases, it is just not feasible. When out of your home area, you're not going to know a cache is going to suck, until after you have found it. --RuffRidr

Some people enjoy lamppost hides. Great. There's obviously a segment that doesn't as well. I'm sure glad my area isn't in the first camp. --RuffRidr

I think it would be great if they had a logbook that all the visitors could sign. --RuffRidr

Brian said very well how I feel. Whenever I find some micro hidden in a parking lot, or a keyholder stuck to a guardrail, I just can't understand that some people enjoy this type of hide, and that someone saw this place and thought it was a good spot for a geocache. Unfortunately, that's fairly common. And I'm surprised that many of the logs of those caches say things like "Thanks for the cache" or "Fun one." I wonder if those people are being truthful or just patronizing. I've hunted all kinds of different hides, and if I think the person didn't put much thought into the hide, I don't mind indicating my experience in my log. I've never used DPM though. On the same coin, if a cache appears well thought out, I won't hesitate to go on and on about the joy I had finding it. Jamie Very well said, both of you. This is where I stand on the issue as well. I couldn't have said it better than you two. --RuffRidr

At least he's hiding caches. It looks to me like CoyoteRed and Sissy have hidden 28 caches. --RuffRidr

First DPM caches, and now this. It must be "Hot Topic" day. Anyone for a lively stats discussion? --RuffRidr

Thanks for enlightening me to the notion of planning. Part of planning, I guess would be to search through previous logs to see what others have said about the caches. I would definitely put a cache on ignore if I had seen others had left notes about this being a "crappy", "lame", or "DPM" cache. --RuffRidr

How would he know it was going to be a DPM cache until after he went after it. I don't see how the Ignore feature helps here. --RuffRidr

Something stinks, and it ain't Des Palourdes Mortes. I think it was "lame" that you deleted their log. So what if someone doesn't like your cache. Not everyone is going to like every cache. Personally, I'd use it as incentive to hide a better cache next time. --RuffRidr

Keenpeople.com has a "Group Geocaching Tool" that allows you to combine your .GPX file with others, so that you can automate this a bit, and get mutual "Not Found" list. However, in a previous thread it was brought up that this most likely violates the TOU for the pocket queries. If they don't implement shared maps, maybe gc.com could at least implement shared pocket queries between premium members. --RuffRidr

There are some very paranoid users of this website who are very adamant about not wanting to be tracked, not wanting to be checked on, etc. Many go so far as to not even post logs, or only post them as notes. I think an idea like yours would get a lot of resistence from them. So I may be wrong, but I don't think there is much of a chance that something like this would get implemented. FYI: I love the idea, and would like to see something like that myself, maybe where you could setup which people could see your maps. --RuffRidr

LOL! Ya, me too. I'm going to stop going to any events that I'm not welcome. That'll show 'em. They'll rue the day... Rue I tell you! --RuffRidr

If you are a premium member and have pocket queries, you can open your query in GSAK and do an arc filter in there. I have used it before on trips. The hardest part is creating all the points along your route. --RuffRidr

Suh-weet! I CANNOT wait until that is implemented. --RuffRidr

NICE!! Very useful feature. --RuffRidr

Hmm, not sure what I think yet. I am sure it will grow on me. --RuffRidr

Ooops, I'm sorry. I just assumed (and you know what they say about assuming) that flask was a he. Can you forgive me? --RuffRidr

That's the worst threat I've ever heard. Look out everyone, he's gonna beg! Sorry, I don't mean to poke fun, but that just struck me as funny. --RuffRidr

What I understand from your post is that you don't like certain caches, so other people shouldn't place them, even though they like them. Isn't this just an example of you trying to control everyone else? Why do you feel the need to do this? I don't think CR is trying to control anyone. He just wants people to put just a thread of thought into cache placement. Who wants to search for a cache in a trash pile, or a loading dock? Anyone? It can't be the kids, or the handicapped people, or for the scenery. Maybe it is for the people new to the sport. Ya, that's a good introduction for them. Or maybe its for the numbers folks, because there are not enough quality caches for them to find. I applaud CoyoteRed and others who are trying to clean up the sport. Or those who are trying to make the reputation of their caching areas a good one. Or those who are trying to educate the newcomers on what constitutes a quality cache. I think when people place a cache they should ask themselves "Why am I bringing people to this spot? What am I trying to show them? What is my goal for this cache?" To me this could be showing them a scenic view, doing a creative hide that hasn't been seen in the area, making a cache that is easily kids accessible or handicap accessible, making a cache that is themed, or a cache that has lots of trade goodies. Something. If the only thing your cache has got going for it, is that it increases your hide number by 1, that is a "lame" cache in my opinion. Why bother? I'm sure some people will never get it. Go on and hide your "lame" caches. Don't be surprised, however, when that becomes your reputation. Don't be surprised by all the logs that say "TNLN, thanks."

What about the new cachers that go out and find 2 or 3 of these caches and decide that searching through old waste dumps and loading docks is not for them? I know of cachers that this was their first introduction to the sport. I'd hate to lose the potentially good hides that these cachers would have provided later. What if a reporter wanted to do an article in the newspaper about Geocaching? Would you take them to any of these "lame" hides? What if they didn't seek out local geocachers and just went on to find these lame caches by themselves? I don't think that would make for a very good article or show us in a very good light. Like I said earlier, I don't want to ban any of these caches. I think we need to work harder and smarter to encourage user's to put more thought into cache placement. Horse: "I'm not quite dead yet." Poster: "You'll be stone dead in a moment." WHACK! --RuffRidr

I think we're looking at this the wrong way. We shouldn't be going out and trying to pinpoint lame caches in the attempt to lower their numbers. I think we need to encourage people to put "great" caches out. In this thread Markwell outlines a great method for doing that. Basically, his idea lets everyone pick up to 10% of the caches they have done and list them as their top caches. When a certain number of cachers have listed this as one of their top caches, the cache gets a special designation. With this type of system in place, we would both have a way to sort out good caches, and also a way to encourage people to put out better caches. Jeremy seemed to like the idea, and it sounds like it might be in its initial phases. Hopefully, we'll see some of his work on this come to fruition. --RuffRidr

If someone techinically inclined were to do that, he/she would make a lot of people happy, I would suspect. --RuffRidr