Jump to content

Suggestion: Novice Caches


Recommended Posts

I have thought reciently, that it would be nice to have a class of cache for NOVICES only.

 

Suggest the name start with 'NOVICE' ie: 'NOVICE - Under the mail box'

Suggest that it be limited to D1/T1 types.

Suggest it be limited to those with less than 20/50/100 finds.

Suggest the HINTS be in the open.

Suggest the cache description, indicate that if you want a bit more challenge go to the adjacent cache 'GC12345' and post the coords to the next nearest cache.

 

An example is Novice - Garlic Cache

 

Something like that.

 

What say you one, What say you all?

 

-- SlideRule (The Fun Is In The Find )

aka: Claude

Link to comment

I like it, something easy for a newbie to find and see how its done is a great idea. Maybe you could do a whole series, each one getting progressively harder:

 

Novice Cache I: Ammo can in the woods (right off of a path, easy hide, etc.)

 

Novice Cache II: Small cache in a park (small tupperware in a local park)

 

Novice Cache III: Urban Micro (Altoids tin, film can, whatever, hidden in an urban setting yet in a place that is easy to hunt in without being seen, and nothing evil, just a simple micro)

 

You could limit the caches to those under a certain amount of finds, but there is no way to enforce this other than deleting logs. Really, if I was to do this, I'd let anyone find them. If a cacher with a bunch of finds wants to find a "Novice Cache", so be it. If they were nearby, I'd probably go for them.

Link to comment

I don't know what a "Novice" cache would be.

 

I've found hundreds of caches, but there is the occasional 'easy' cache (1/1, good hint) that for whatever reason, I just can't find while others have no problem at all. On the flip side, the second cache I ever found was a 2/2 that numerous people had DNF'd. I found it under two feet of snow in an area that had terrible satellite reception.

Link to comment

Quick reminder that a Terrian difficulty of 1 is defined as wheelchair accessible.

 

Back on subject, the current T/D ratings generally work well to id an "easy" cache. I see no need for further classifications. Novices should sitck to 2/2 or less for easy ones.

 

 

(This, of course assumes that caches are semi-correctly classified on the D/T scale)

Link to comment

I think we do have a good system already, my thought is that sometimes, people don't rate them corredctly. What may seem easy (1/1) for you might not be as easy for me. I am slightly terrain challenged, (knee and ankle problems) so I usually look for caches with a terrain rating of 2 or less. But the very first cache I ever found wouldn't have been a find for me if my son wasn't with me to help me along the trail to the cache. Some people don't use the cache rating system, they must just say, oh, it's easy for me to get there, so it's a 1.5 That's just plain inconsiderate of the people who have physically challenged bodies like mine! So, bing a newbie at the time, and not being able to get to some of the more terrain difficult caches is rather disheartening, and would have made me chuck the whole business, if my son hadn't been there and encouraged me and helped me along. :P

Link to comment

I would actually like to see the terrain rating system go from 1 to 10 so as to hopefully get a better idea of exactly what we are getting into. For instance if the cacher needs a kayak to get to the cache it is considered to be a 5 but if the cacher needed to repel to get to it it would also be a 5 in my mind those are very different in terrain.

 

Like CrafterCat I also feel that there are people out there that do not use the rating system that well. For instance I have been on caches that are a 1 in terrain and there is no way that a wheelchair would be able to get to it.

 

Mrs Nushiekitty

Link to comment

I would not put in the note that finds will be deleted once a cacher gets over 100 finds. That is not fair to the novice cacher that finds it and then goes on to bigger and better things and hits the century mark. Once a find it logged and approved by the hider, it should stay. Period!

Link to comment

If our rating system is appled correctly then that should suffice.

 

And what is a Novice, I've had some so called experieced cachers having a hell of a time with some of my caches. Maybe because they are not designed for a Wal-Mart parking lot.

 

Maybe I'm a novice because my finds are only at 200; and with so little experience how am I able to hide some real tough caches.

Link to comment
I would not put in the note that finds will be deleted once a cacher gets over 100 finds. 

Maybe what I should do is change the note to read, you will not get credit for this cache is you already have 20/50/100 finds.

 

I agree, once found and logged, the finder should get credit, for all time, for the find.

Link to comment

As novices ourselves, we tend to stick to caches with a difficulty of 3 or less. (Terrain's not been too much of a problem -- yet ...) However, we always read the descriptions carefully before deciding whether to attempt a cache or not and base our decision on that. There are several I can think of that at first blush sounded rather simple, but after reading about them, we decided against it. And there were others with slightly higher difficulties that turned out not so bad. Of course, the descriptions don't always tell the whole story either.

 

For example, our first find ever was a 1.5/1 MICRO, and later we managed to find a 2/1 Cache without a GPS! (Of course, we were very familiar with the park, but still ...) But we had a DNF for a 1/1.5 cache, which is obviously not missing because people logged the find less than a week before we visited and about half a dozen have logged it since then! (And everybody says it's "Easy". Yeah ...)

 

So, the D/T ratings are subjective, just like any rating system would be, but I think they're adequate. Coupled with the cache size indicator (or whatever you want to call it) and the description, I think you have a decent system you can use to make an informed decision about which caches to hunt. Nothing's going to be perfect, but I think it's good enough for now.

 

That being said, I think VegasCacheHounds has a good idea -- just like there are cemetery caches, Wal Mart caches, and other series like that, why not start another "series" called the Novice series? Maybe it'll catch on like these others have. They can all be 1/1's or something, and adding the keyword "Novice" to the title would certainly make it easier to search for the listings.

Edited by RandLD
Link to comment

A bit more of my thoughts on the Novice idea:

 

I know that the ratings should[/] indicate how tough a cache is to find, but in my suggestion I was thinking that these Novice caches would be hidden in a spot that is quite obvious to a cacher, and real easy to find. Of course, this would make them easy for a muggle to find, so they would require a lot of regular maintenance.

Link to comment
I have thought reciently, that it would be nice to have a class of cache for NOVICES only.

I don't know what the specific problem is that you are trying to solve. The 1/1 rule is generally sound, and with some quick views of a cache listing you can pick one that looks pretty easy. You can even decrypt the hints and many of the 1/1 tell you exactly where it is.

 

I understand the request but it creates a burden on the cache lister to determine whether their cache listing is good for a novice. Generally speaking it should be pretty good for a novice if the difficulty is a 1.

 

Without sounding like a curmudgeon and saying that we haven't had a need for it before, I would say that it is an interesting idea but the existing (albeit inferior) idea has been in place for a while now and does a pretty good job of helping new geocachers find the easier ones.

Link to comment
Maybe what I should do is change the note to read, you will not get credit for this cache is you already have 20/50/100 finds.

Bad idea.

 

You will become an ogre if you try to enforce this rule. Then you won't have fun and the deleted finders won't have fun. Why set up a condition that encourages not having fun?

Link to comment

While it's not an idea I particularly endorse, an Australian cacher set a cache that was supposed to be logged only by novices, defined as under 30 finds.

It wasn't popular, as the other cachers wanted to get a smiley if they went to find it, even if only to get it off their 'nearest' list.

 

Their solution was to allow double logs for novices and jus the usual log for everyone else. It seemed to work well enough...

Link to comment

We have a couple of beginner caches and mark them as such in the description. Azalea Park Cache and "Christmas-y" tree stand in stark contrast to GEOCACHE=3282062 though the D/T is much different.

 

I do like the idea of caches placed specifically with an eye on introducing new cachers to the hobby. I think it's a good idea, but there is no need to over-complicate things.

 

I guess you could start your own trend of "NOVICE: Cache Name" caches wherever you are, but I like the idea of a nice easy regular-sized cache placed in a nice location that even experienced cachers can enjoy.

 

Hope this helps.

Link to comment
QUOTE (SlideRule @ Jun 15 2005, 08:37 AM)

Maybe what I should do is change the note to read, you will not get credit for this cache is you already have 20/50/100 finds.

 

Bad idea.

 

You will become an ogre if you try to enforce this rule. Then you won't have fun and the deleted finders won't have fun. Why set up a condition that encourages not having fun?

 

I just wanted to reemphasize this point. Have you ever deleted someone's log from one of your caches? NO FUN a whole lot of NO FUN...... you'll make yourself incredibly unpopular with the established cachers in your area if you place a cache and refuse to let them log it. And why? why shouldn't they hunt an easy one?

 

A geo-buddy of mine just placed four EZ 1 difficulty caches in an area where another hider had been dropping some fabulous (evil wicked omigod) 3 to 5s... this to give the novice cachers something to hunt and the veterans something to find without a brain cramp. That's serving the geo-community.

Link to comment

If the goal is to help novice cachers identify easier caches so they can gain some experience, then you could always put together a bookmark list of hides that you feel would be appropriate for novices. I think in general, seeking 1/1s with clues should be enough for most to get their arms around the hunting/finding process, though. I really don't think any additional "novice" designation is necessary for the caches themselves.

 

But there is more for novices to learn than just how to find a cache. There are a number of things to learn in regards to swapping, hiding caches, travel bugs, and so on. This is why I liked the idea which was being discussed a few months back about some kind of a mentoring program for new geocachers.

Link to comment
Maybe what I should do is change the note to read, you will not get credit for this cache is you already have 20/50/100 finds.

Bad idea.

 

You will become an ogre if you try to enforce this rule. Then you won't have fun and the deleted finders won't have fun. Why set up a condition that encourages not having fun?

Agreed. A cache is a cache, if I want to hunt down an easy one so what? I found it I log it. Should be no rules whatsoever on who can score a cache. And frankly, a "newbie" or "novice" cache is a 1 star difficulty, that's why we have the system we do already in place. If you're brand new to the game and decide to try a 3 star hide, prepare for a DNF. But just because I've been around a while doesn't mean I should be "banned" from finding your new easy hide. Imagine if I reversed that thinking and said that no cacher who has under 800 finds will be allowed to score my new 5 star hide. Is that fair? No.

Link to comment
Their solution was to allow double logs for novices and jus the usual log for everyone else. It seemed to work well enough...

Hummm.... :o

 

I would hope that the novices or the cache owner would delete their second find after they reach 50 or more cache finds. Otherwise this policy doesn't sit well with me.

 

I give novices a lot of latitude (is this a pun?) when I find that they have inappropriately logged one of my caches as a find. I will send a non-shaming, non-negative email to them politely describing the correct protocol and will not threaten to delete their find. Hopefully they will do that on their own.

 

If in the future, if I find that they stay with the game and have at least 50 to 100 cache finds I might send another email nicely requesting that they delete the inappropriate find. Or sometimes I delete it myself and post a note dated same day as their original find that states what I've done - not that they will actually find that note.

 

It is very important not to send negative email or cache page comments to novices. It can turn them away from the sport.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...