Fake 5/5's

[+Husker]

Why do people put out these things? What's the point of putting out a 1/1 and listing it as a 5/5.

 

There was a new 5/5 place sort of near me. I was looking forward to finding untill I saw the logs. It's pretty obvious that it's not a 5/5. The logs are kinda funny but after reading a couple, they get old.

[+JoGPS]

Queen of Tennessee Plantations

 

I placed a Five X Five cache a week or so before Geowoodstock11 came to Nashville just to see how many folks would pull Five X Five caches in pockets query’s or just go for the easier caches. It turned out that the only folks that found it were the die hard high number cacher’s , now who would have thought that Heee Heee.

 

But in my own defense the cache page clearly said:

 

“”The Difficulty and Terrain levels are for someone that is four yeas old and anyone older or bigger the ratings go down quite a bit””

 

I would dare any four year old kid that they would not have found or retrieve the cache with out special equipment

 

JOE

[+Snoogans]

I have quite a few high terrain and difficulty caches. Most are NOT as difficult as listed, but with good reason.

 

Here is a discussion that happened earlier.

 

BTW- It's kinda lame to call another's cache lame unless you actually did their cache. From the OP, it sure sounds like you haven't.

Edited October 24, 2005 by Snoogans

[Skovar]

I placed a Five X Five cache a week or so before Geowoodstock11 came to Nashville just to see how many folks would pull Five X Five caches in pockets query’s or just go for the easier caches. It turned out that the only folks that found it were the die hard high number cacher’s , now who would have thought that Heee Heee.

I would. Besides the "warning" on the page, were the "high-number cachers" also chauffered to the cache and handed the logbook to sign, or was the logbook brought to the event for them to sign without doing the cache? "Heee Heee"

 

Why do people put out these things? What's the point of putting out a 1/1 and listing it as a 5/5.

 

They think they're being funny.

Edited October 24, 2005 by Skovar

[+The Leprechauns]

I placed a Five X Five cache a week or so before Geowoodstock11 came to Nashville just to see how many folks would pull Five X Five caches in pockets query’s or just go for the easier caches. It turned out that the only folks that found it were the die hard high number cacher’s , now who would have thought that Heee Heee.

I would. Besides the "warning" on the page, were the "high-number cachers" also chauffered to the cache and handed the logbook to sign, or was the logbook brought to the event for them to sign without doing the cache? "Heee Heee"

 

Why do people put out these things? What's the point of putting out a 1/1 and listing it as a 5/5.

 

They think they're being funny.

I was one of the "high numbers" people who found this cache on the weekend of Geo Woodstock II. Although the ratings were exaggerated, the cache stands out clearly in my mind, more than a year later, because of the clever container and hiding technique. It stumped me and one of the other two searchers in my group managed to score the find.

 

So be careful when choosing who to tell jokes about. Some of them may be reading.

[Skovar]

So be careful when choosing who to tell jokes about.  Some of them may be reading.

Okay, I don't usually check profiles, but I made an exception after reading your response. I know "high-numbers people." A "high-number person" was a friend of mine. You, Mr. Leprechaun, are no "high-number person." ;)

(Well, it is election season.) ;)

 

But even today, your numbers wouldn't qualify you for the "chauffer treatment." Why, I understand that in some areas, newbies amass more than your total in a matter of weeks. :D

 

Edit: Needed more laughing frogs. Sure wish I knew how to put a hamster scalp atop the laughing frog emoticon. :D

 

Subsequent Edits: Then again, you haven't actually denied being chauffered to caches at GeoWoodstock II, so maybe you were? That's even funnier! But you have verified that you "were handed the logbook to sign" wiithout actually finding the cache yourself, so thanks that tidbit of information. :lol:

Edited October 24, 2005 by Skovar

[+Isonzo Karst]

More annoying than fake 5/5s are all the canoe kayak boat caches around with terrain ratings anywhere from 2 to 4. I appreciate that the paddling may be real pleasant and simple - but they do require a boat. I've only encountered one that was, possibly in semi-drought conditions, wadable.

[+Snoogans]

But we do know now that you signed the log without actually finding the cache, so thanks for that tidbit of information.

Oh gawd.

 

That whole argument was settled in early 2002, I believe.

 

Lep's find is legit. Everyone else seems to know that. Where have you been?

[+The Leprechauns]

But you have verified that you "were handed the logbook to sign" wiithout actually finding the cache yourself, so thanks that tidbit of information.

Apparently you've never hunted a cache while in the company of another geocacher. I can certainly understand why that would be. Just to fill you in on how it works, sometimes the other person finds it first.

[Skovar]

But you have verified that you "were handed the logbook to sign" wiithout actually finding the cache yourself, so thanks that tidbit of information.

Apparently you've never hunted a cache while in the company of another geocacher. I can certainly understand why that would be. Just to fill you in on how it works, sometimes the other person finds it first.

Aren't they supposed to rehide the cache, preserving the challenge for others in the group? That's the way I remember it. When did "remedial geocaching" become the norm?

 

Oh, that's right ... around the same time that the term "Numbers Whore" was coined. ;)

[+Quiggle]

From the Forum Guidelines at the top left of every forum page:

Some things to keep in mind when posting:

 

Respect: Respect the guidelines for forum usage, and site usage. Respect Groundspeak, its employees, volunteers, yourself, fellow community members, and guests on these boards. Whether a community member has one post or 5,000 posts, they deserve the same respect.

 

Personal Attacks and Flames will not be tolerated. If you want to praise or criticize, give examples as to why it is good or bad, general attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated.

[Skovar]

And I accept The Leprechaun's apology.

[+JoGPS]

Skovar, The Leprechaun's does not owe you an apology, you owe him one.

 

And because you are a obvious sock puppet you should be banned

 

That that should make you laugh.

 

Joe

[+Isonzo Karst]

In any case, it's Numbers Ho.

[Skovar]

Skovar, The Leprechaun's does not owe you an apology, you owe him one.

 

And because you are a obvious sock puppet you should be banned

 

That that should make you laugh.

 

Joe

Maybe you should be banned for spouting off when you don't know what you are talking about. You've done it quite often, and then you wait for (other) site volunteers to extricate you from the mess you created.

 

I recently deleted my finds. If you wish to check their legitimacy, I encourage you to seek out the logbooks and view them personally. I have also found many caches and signed many logbooks without claiming finds online. There's a lot of evidence out there, in several (16, I think) states. Go find 'em. "Hee Hee"

Edited October 24, 2005 by Skovar

[+Snoogans]

Skovar, The Leprechaun's does not owe you an apology, you owe him one.

 

And because you are a obvious sock puppet you should be banned

 

That that should make you laugh.

 

Joe

Maybe you should be banned for spouting off when you don't know what you are talking about. You've done it quite often, and then you wait for (other) site volunteers to extricate you from the mess you created.

 

I recently deleted my finds. If you wish to check their legitimacy, I encourage you to seek out the logbooks and view them personally. I have also found many caches and signed many logbooks without claiming finds online. There's a lot of evidence out there, in several (16, I think) states. Go find 'em. "Hee Hee"

I think I smell an agenda surfacing. I could be wrong. I've been up for over 24 hours. *Yawn*

[Tahosa and Sons]

This one is not a fake 5 x 5. I'm going to have to pull and most likely archive this cache just because its just too difficult for the average cacher. But it opens up the area where I can start a series next year.

Why not a D Day special, a real 6 x 6 next year on 6/6/06

[+AtoZ]

Skovar, The Leprechaun's does not owe you an apology, you owe him one.

 

And because you are a obvious sock puppet you should be banned

 

That that should make you laugh.

 

Joe

Maybe you should be banned for spouting off when you don't know what you are talking about. You've done it quite often, and then you wait for (other) site volunteers to extricate you from the mess you created.

 

I recently deleted my finds. If you wish to check their legitimacy, I encourage you to seek out the logbooks and view them personally. I have also found many caches and signed many logbooks without claiming finds online. There's a lot of evidence out there, in several (16, I think) states. Go find 'em. "Hee Hee"

I think I smell an agenda surfacing. I could be wrong. I've been up for over 24 hours. *Yawn*

Agree as Skovar seems to be a TROLL.

cheers

[+Teamhawaii1981 & blueicyrose]

Anyways back to the discussion at hand:

 

I think the D/T ratings should be the one thing that should not be lied about. Some of the simple caches where the description makes it out to be the next Odyssey are hilarious; but each of those I have seen are always truthful in the D/T rating. I know cachers, and I do it sometimes as well, that just look at the coordinates and the D/T before leaving the house. It would be horrible to get somewhere and find that you have to go on a 10 mile hike when you were hoping to just go on a lunchbreak cache (and vice versa).

 

Anyways, I would not call it lame, because I'm sure there are creative reasons for doing it; but it is something that would make many cachers frustrated and not like your cache, which I would think would not be a goal of a hider.

 

(Not that I can speak because I have yet to hide one)

[+Snoogans]

I'm going to have to pull and most likely archive this cache just because its just too difficult for the average cacher. But it opens up the area where I can start a series next year.

Why not a D Day special, a real 6 x 6 next year on 6/6/06

FWIW, DON'T pull it. My Row Vs. Wade cache is a year older than that one with the same number of visitors.

 

No one seems to want to post a DNF on it because they expected it to be a bit easier than advertised. The stories I've heard about these attempts, at events, have been well worth the wait for a find.

 

Think of it this way. You won't hafta check on it near as often as your other caches. That's my main reason for hiding the hard ones.

[uperdooper]

But you have verified that you "were handed the logbook to sign" wiithout actually finding the cache yourself, so thanks that tidbit of information. B)

Apparently you've never hunted a cache while in the company of another geocacher. I can certainly understand why that would be. Just to fill you in on how it works, sometimes the other person finds it first.

Aren't they supposed to rehide the cache, preserving the challenge for others in the group? That's the way I remember it. When did "remedial geocaching" become the norm?

 

Oh, that's right ... around the same time that the term "Numbers Whore" was coined. :)

so! when someone's 5 year old finds the cache first, he/she isn't supposed to tell mommy or daddy where the cache is?

[+Touchstone]

That's what my six year old does....how does it work in you family?

[+Pyewacket]

I recently deleted my finds.  If you wish to check their legitimacy, I encourage you to seek out the logbooks and view them personally.  I have also found many caches and signed many logbooks without claiming finds online.  There's a lot of evidence out there, in several (16, I think) states.  Go find 'em.  "Hee Hee"

Ooooohhh...you played the martyr card! What an unexpected development!

 

 

Tell ya what...go caching with me and I'll show ya how to turn a 1/1 into a 3/3 or higher.

 

 

I won't even make ya log the find online!

 

Now, go and find something worthy about which to complain.

[uperdooper]

That's what my six year old does....how does it work in you family?

i was smart enough to avoid having children, although that can be a pain in the tush when doing a cache near a playground. there aren't any around here that i can borrow very often either.

[+Lil Devil]

i was smart enough to avoid having children, although that can be a pain in the tush when doing a cache near a playground. 

I don't let that be a problem. I just go in, find the cache and sign the log quickly, then leave before the cops arrive B)

 

 

 

 

It's a joke, son, I was kidding!

 

 

Thinly veiled attempt to stay on topic: I've never done a fake 5/5 so I have no comment on them. I have, however, found a couple of real 5/5's, which I thoroughly enjoyed.

[+Airmapper]

Does 5/5 stand for, Find in 5 minutes, and 5 steps from the car?

[+humanloofa]

I always look at D/T rating because I do have some problems with my knees, and I often cache with an eight year old. Unless it was apparently a joke, I wouldn't go after it. The D/T rating is there for a reason not a joke. If I came across one miss labeled, I would ask the local approver to have a chat with the placer and see about getting it changed. I had one that I had to bump the terrain ratting on because it was too low, and a fellow cacher in a wheel chair informed me about it. They did get it and were nice to me in there e-mail but I wounder how many misrepresented caches there are out ther.