Micro Vs Traditional.

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

On the flip side, it takes almost zero creativity to hide a difficult micro versus a difficult regular.

And your answer is to insult people that don't think the way you do?

 

Well, that and to bring up their find counts, since that's the most important factor in judging one's opinion.

 

Now, that's disingenuous, at best.

 

Certainly helps your cause in being forthright and honest.

 

Well, you ARE the one who countered my post in a civilized debate by bringing up my find count, aren't you?

 

No, I didn't.

 

You might want to go back read it again and read it in context. The context of which was you blathering on about doing your homework before going out to hunt a cache. Not everyone caches with such a slow and methodical way as you do. Don't assume they should.

 

Whatever. You can lie and deny all you want, but CLEARLY you DID bring up my find count, whether you'll admit it or not.

 

And I hardly think "doing your homework" means caching at my pace, nor did I say or imply that. Remember, YOU'RE the one that cited my find count, and now you're choosing to turn into a straw man. Nice try, but no one's falling for it.

[CoyoteRed]

You can lie and deny...

 

Lie and deny? That would be funny if it weren't so sad. Dude, I linked to the post you're referencing. You don't think folks can read for themselves?

 

Here, I'll spell it out for you. The way you've cached in the past is what has shaped your opinion. Your past is not like that of others. No cache runs. From your posts and opinions I take it that you've done little to no caching when opportunity presents itself. Quite frankly, I don't think you can speak on that which you don't know.

[CoyoteRed]

Do YOU really think disabled people want to spend the rest of their geo-lifetimes looking at lists of ammo cans in the woods that they can't get to? Unless you yourself are disabled in some way, you have no idea what you're talking about, so quit trying to put yourself in their shoes, and quit acting like you speak for the entire community.

 

Oh, this is too funny! Anyone else see the irony in the above?

[+thedeadpirate]

For the bazillionth time, the issue is not micros, or urban and suburban caches. It's thoughtlessly placed caches.

 

I agree with you. I believe the post I replied to though sarcastically called folks lazy if they didn't place caches in the woods placing some statement about the bugs, mud, etc. Perhaps I would not have taken issue if that poster had kept to talking about thoughtlessly placed caches. However, just because a cache is not placed in the woods does not make it thoughtless, nor does it make the placer lazy.

 

Do you really think disabled people want to spend the rest of their geo-lifetimes going from parking lot lamp posts to 7-Eleven dumpsters and back? I think most disabled people would have their fill of Wal-mart parking lots after a while and what is wrong with giving them (and everyone else ) caches in interesting and/or appealing places.

 

I would not even attempt to speak for all disabled cachers. I can tell you that I am happy hunting Wally World caches. I even went out and looked for some puzzles last week. I have even, gasp, looked for ammo cans in the woods. But that is me. I look for what I like. I just don't think anyone has the right to impose their standards of quality on everyone else.

 

And again, you aren't lazy just because you don't put all your caches in the woods.

[CoyoteRed]

I can tell you that I am happy hunting Wally World caches.

 

Why?

[+clearpath]

I can tell you that I am happy hunting Wally World caches.

 

Why?

Cause his mother works at Wally World ...

[+thedeadpirate]

Because it's there and I can get to it. Is it my favorite? No. Do I prefer the caches in more interesting locations? Sure I do. Am I a numbers hound? I don't thinks so. I am one that supports your idea to hide the stats cause I cache for myself, not anyone else.

 

Maybe I am an enigma cause I don't get bent out of shape over spew. I dunno. I do know I'm not alone.

[+thedeadpirate]

Cause his mother works at Wally World ...

 

That's rude and doesn't really warrant a reply.

[+KBI]

Well, you ARE the one who countered my post in a civilized debate by bringing up my find count, aren't you?

 

No, I didn't.

 

You might want to go back read it again and read it in context.

That's some pretty weak backpedaling, CR. I read the linked post when it first went up, and I interpreted it the same way ParrotRob did. It was pretty clear to me that you were not-too-subtly referring to his find stats.

 

 

The context of which was you blathering on about doing your homework before going out to hunt a cache.

Not only did you pointlessly drag PR's find count into the discussion, you completely missed the point of his "homework" comment. He was responding to sbell111's post about paperless caching, and whether skipping such 'homework' (reading the cache descriptions in advance) might help one avoid some of the 'undesirable' (lame) caches.

 

What does blathering about his stats have to do with any of that?

 

 

Not everyone caches with such a slow and methodical way as you do. Don't assume they should.

Why so defensive about the homework/preparation comment, CR? By any chance have you caused yourself any embarrassments by failing to be slow and methodical lately?

 

I don't recall anyone saying or implying that you have to do your homework, CR. You're free to proceed as responsibly (or irresponsibly) as you like. The point is that when you choose not to read cache descriptions, you also choose whatever problems you bring upon yourself as a result.

[CoyoteRed]

Do I prefer the caches in more interesting locations? Sure I do.

 

Then why not support placing caches in more interesting locations?

 

There are generally much more interesting locations in urban settings than mall parking lots, why not place caches there? That's what most of us are saying, just choose more interesting locations.

 

We used to hunt everything that was in front of us. It got old pretty quick when folks started taking us to places where we had to ask the question, "why in the world would anyone want to show us this?" Then it started getting more prevalent. Some folks thought it was micros that was the cause, but I saw it in smalls and regulars, as well. Thoughtless caches come in all sizes, it's just that 90% or better are micros.

 

Why micros? Cheaper to hide and replace, easier to hide, or desire to not deal with trinket depletion could all be reasons to use a micro in a thoughtless hide. Why put too much effort into the container and putting it together when not much thought is being put into the location?

 

So, if you're not into grabbing a smilie, I predict you will eventually tire of mediocre hides and would much rather spend your time on ones that get you more than a parking spot at Wal-mart.

[+grey_wolf & momcat]

Well, you ARE the one who countered my post in a civilized debate by bringing up my find count, aren't you?

 

No, I didn't.

 

You might want to go back read it again and read it in context.

That's some pretty weak backpedaling, CR. I read the linked post when it first went up, and I interpreted it the same way ParrotRob did. It was pretty clear to me that you were not-too-subtly referring to his find stats.

 

 

The context of which was you blathering on about doing your homework before going out to hunt a cache.

Not only did you pointlessly drag PR's find count into the discussion, you completely missed the point of his "homework" comment. He was responding to sbell111's post about paperless caching, and whether skipping such 'homework' (reading the cache descriptions in advance) might help one avoid some of the 'undesirable' (lame) caches.

 

What does blathering about his stats have to do with any of that?

 

 

Not everyone caches with such a slow and methodical way as you do. Don't assume they should.

Why so defensive about the homework/preparation comment, CR? By any chance have you caused yourself any embarrassments by failing to be slow and methodical lately?

 

I don't recall anyone saying or implying that you have to do your homework, CR. You're free to proceed as responsibly (or irresponsibly) as you like. The point is that when you choose not to read cache descriptions, you also choose whatever problems you bring upon yourself as a result.

 

HERE we go into the fire.

 

It seems that the folks that don't cache "much or any" seem to be the most offended when numbers are brought up. I truly believe that most cachers use the smileys on gc to keep track of their numbers. There are some I know that don't log any caches. But they are very few. If you haven't done certain types of caches, it is real hard to feel that you are an expert on them.

 

Shields Up

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

You can lie and deny...

 

Lie and deny? That would be funny if it weren't so sad. Dude, I linked to the post you're referencing. You don't think folks can read for themselves?

 

Here, I'll spell it out for you. The way you've cached in the past is what has shaped your opinion. Your past is not like that of others. No cache runs. From your posts and opinions I take it that you've done little to no caching when opportunity presents itself. Quite frankly, I don't think you can speak on that which you don't know.

 

Yes, lie and deny. This part would be the "deny" part.

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

Quite frankly, I don't think you can speak on that which you don't know.

 

See? You're doing it again.

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

I can tell you that I am happy hunting Wally World caches.

 

Why?

 

Because he is. The same reason you are happy doing, well, whatever makes you happy. Once again, it appears that you are too shallow to understand that what makes YOU happy is NOT what makes EVERYONE happy. This really is getting pretty tiresome, you know.

 

By the way, apparently no one else DID see it. Probably because most people actually see who the elitist attempting to make everyone see things HIS way really is.

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

Do I prefer the caches in more interesting locations? Sure I do.

 

Then why not support placing caches in more interesting locations?

 

There are generally much more interesting locations in urban settings than mall parking lots, why not place caches there? That's what most of us are saying, just choose more interesting locations.

 

Translation: "just choose locations that are more interesting TO ME because my opinion is the only correct one."

Edited June 13, 2006 by ParrotRob

[+briansnat]

But what I really take issue with is your apparent feeling that if someone doesn't hike out in the woods to place a cache that they are LAZY???? How about handicap? How about remembering that not everyone can make hike deep in the woods, climb the highest mountain, swim the deepest sea, go where no man has gone before.

 

For the bazillionth time, the issue is not micros, or urban and suburban caches. It's thoughtlessly placed caches.

 

Do you really think disabled people want to spend the rest of their geo-lifetimes going from parking lot lamp posts to 7-Eleven dumpsters and back? I think most disabled people would have their fill of Wal-mart parking lots after a while and what is wrong with giving them (and everyone else ) caches in interesting and/or appealing places.

 

For the bazillionth time, YOU are not the judge of what is INTERESTING or APPEALING. Do YOU really think disabled people want to spend the rest of their geo-lifetimes looking at lists of ammo cans in the woods that they can't get to? Unless you yourself are disabled in some way, you have no idea what you're talking about, so quit trying to put yourself in their shoes, and quit acting like you speak for the entire community.

 

 

Did I say I was the arbiter of what is appealing and what is interesting? Please show me where. I will however go out on a limb and say that MOST people don't find the dumpster area behind a mall, or guardrails to be particularly interesting and MOST people don't find garbage and feces strewn lots to be appealing. Of course I don't speak for everyone and I'm sure there are geocachers out there who absolutely love these places and would rather visit them then a scenic overlook or a pretty suburban park (yeah, yeah, who am I to decide what is pretty and what is scenic ).

Edited June 13, 2006 by briansnat

[+sbell111]

Then why not support placing caches in more interesting locations?

Please point me to a post on any thread that suggested that anyone did not support placing caches in interesting locations? I can't remember anyone posting that.

 

However, 'location' is not the only indicator of a good cache. There are several others. By focusing on just location, you polarize the issue and you ignore many, many great caches. BTW, as noted in this thread, even micros hidden in light pole bases have merit. In fact, I have yet to see a convincing argument that shows that lots of people don't enjoy them. Just because you don't like them doesn't incite me to take up the battle against them.

There are generally much more interesting locations in urban settings than mall parking lots, why not place caches there? ...

Again, caches continue to be hidden in these 'interesting locations'. Feel free to hide some more in places you find interesting. You can also feel free to tell people how much you enjoyed their caches that were hidden in places you liked.

We used to hunt everything that was in front of us. It got old pretty quick when folks started taking us to places where we had to ask the question, "why in the world would anyone want to show us this?" Then it started getting more prevalent. Some folks thought it was micros that was the cause, but I saw it in smalls and regulars, as well. Thoughtless caches come in all sizes, it's just that 90% or better are micros.

Burnout is an issue in all activities. In fact, a search would likely turn up several threads on it. Either way, we fight burnout in different ways. Some people would come up with better ways of parsing the data to give them caches that they believe that they would like. Others just take a little break, clear their angsty minds and then attack the hobby with gusto. Still others prefer to rail against the status quo and expect the world to cahnge for them. Which one are you?

Why micros? Cheaper to hide and replace, easier to hide, or desire to not deal with trinket depletion could all be reasons to use a micro in a thoughtless hide. Why put too much effort into the container and putting it together when not much thought is being put into the location?

Blah-blah-blah. You create these reasons that micros are placed. In some cases, they are probably even valid. Of course, there are many other reasons, as well. Here's some: the cacher likes micros better, the cacher believes that a micro would be best in that location, the cacher is sick of his great trade items being traded out for trash, the cacher is trying to cheese off you, etc.

So, if you're not into grabbing a smilie, I predict you will eventually tire of mediocre hides and would much rather spend your time on ones that get you more than a parking spot at Wal-mart.

Let's be honest. Between you and me, don't you think that your personal bias is greatly interfering with your objectivity?

[+sbell111]

Did I say I was the arbiter of what is appealing and what is interesting? Please show me where. I will however go out on a limb and say that MOST people don't find the dumpster area behind a mall, or guardrails to be particularly interesting and MOST people don't find garbage and feces strewn lots to be appealing. Of course I don't speak for everyone and I'm sure there are geocachers out there who absolutely love these places and would rather visit them then a scenic overlook or a pretty suburban park (yeah, yeah, who am I to decide what is pretty and what is scenic ).

Dumpster area behind the mall- One of my favorite caches was a micro in a dumpster area behind the local mall. JoGPS created the cache that made you follow directions to take a trip through the mall and out a service door to find the cache. It was quite fun.

 

Guardrails- Guardrail caches can be quite challenging. In fact, JoGPS has one locally that I haven't yet been able to figure out. I'll try it again when I am in the area and have a few minutes to look.

 

Garbage and feces strewn lots- Dude, where do you live that this is a problem? Locally, I have looked for a couple caches that led me to locations that obviously were the home to the homeless. I took a very few minutes trying to find the cache and then moved on. When I got home I put the caches on my ignore list. This keeps me from ever having to deal with them and their existence keeps other caches from these lots. Of course, I could have done some CITO while I was on site, but I didn't.

 

Scenic overlook- No one is arguing with you. These locations are good places for caches; perhaps a magnetic micro on the guardrail.

 

Suburban park- I've hidden several caches (of various sizes) in suburban (and urban) parks. I like to find caches in parks that I didn't know about previously. These parks are good locations for caches, but not the only good locations.

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

 

Garbage and feces strewn lots- Dude, where do you live that this is a problem? Locally, I have looked for a couple caches that led me to locations that obviously were the home to the homeless.

 

Isn't that an oxymoron?

[+sbell111]

Who are you calling an oxymoron? Where's the mods when I need one?

[+The Jester]

Do I prefer the caches in more interesting locations? Sure I do.

 

Then why not support placing caches in more interesting locations?

 

There are generally much more interesting locations in urban settings than mall parking lots, why not place caches there? That's what most of us are saying, just choose more interesting locations.

But location isn't everything when placing a cache. I've seen many interesting/unique camo jobs that would not fit some of your "more interesting locations". I've also hunted caches where at first it seemed it might be a lamp post hide - and if you then skipped it, you be missing out - that turned out to be completely different.

And how does a parking lot cache mean "more interesting location" can't also have a cache (aside from the .1 mile rule).

 

We used to hunt everything that was in front of us. It got old pretty quick when folks started taking us to places where we had to ask the question, "why in the world would anyone want to show us this?" Then it started getting more prevalent. Some folks thought it was micros that was the cause, but I saw it in smalls and regulars, as well. Thoughtless caches come in all sizes, it's just that 90% or better are micros.

 

Why micros? Cheaper to hide and replace, easier to hide, or desire to not deal with trinket depletion could all be reasons to use a micro in a thoughtless hide. Why put too much effort into the container and putting it together when not much thought is being put into the location?

 

So, if you're not into grabbing a smilie, I predict you will eventually tire of mediocre hides and would much rather spend your time on ones that get you more than a parking spot at Wal-mart.

And I predict you will eventually tire of complaining about things others like - but when will either of our predictions come true? It's been 5 years for me and I still like all sorts of caches, I guess I'll also have to be patient waiting for my prediction to come true.

[CoyoteRed]

Quite frankly, I don't think you can speak on that which you don't know.

 

See? You're doing it again.

 

And you don't?

 

How hypocritical to complain about a perceived slight and turn right around do it to someone else.

 

So, which is? Can you dismiss someone's opinion based on their lack of experience or not?

[CoyoteRed]

And I predict you will eventually tire of complaining about things others like...

 

Ah, so you admit you like thoughtless, uninspired caches? You promote them? Think they are good for the hobby?

[CoyoteRed]

Do I prefer the caches in more interesting locations? Sure I do.

 

Then why not support placing caches in more interesting locations?

 

There are generally much more interesting locations in urban settings than mall parking lots, why not place caches there? That's what most of us are saying, just choose more interesting locations.

 

Translation: "just choose locations that are more interesting TO ME because my opinion is the only correct one."

 

Versus your opinion is the only right one?

[+sbell111]

Quite frankly, I don't think you can speak on that which you don't know.

See? You're doing it again.

And you don't?

 

How hypocritical to complain about a perceived slight and turn right around do it to someone else.

 

So, which is? Can you dismiss someone's opinion based on their lack of experience or not?

Ummm, did you post link to the wrong post? The one you posted doesn't make your argument.

[+sbell111]

And I predict you will eventually tire of complaining about things others like...

Ah, so you admit you like thoughtless, uninspired caches? You promote them? Think they are good for the hobby?

I'd say that your logic was flawed, but it doesn't appear that you used any.

Translation: "just choose locations that are more interesting TO ME because my opinion is the only correct one."

Versus your opinion is the only right one?

In your world when someone tells you that you should not have the right to limit the game for everyone, he is really saying that he wants to limit your play? Hmmm, I think your logic chip may have burned out.

[+clearpath]

Thank God I'm not in the middle of this fruckus ...

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

Quite frankly, I don't think you can speak on that which you don't know.

 

See? You're doing it again.

 

And you don't?

 

How hypocritical to complain about a perceived slight and turn right around do it to someone else.

 

So, which is? Can you dismiss someone's opinion based on their lack of experience or not?

 

Are you really that obtuse or do you just act that way to get attention? There is a HUGE difference between you pretending to know what it's like to be disabled and my pretending to know about geocaching because you don't like my find count.

 

By the way, what you were DOING again was exactly what you said you weren't doing - citing my find count.

 

But then again, we've already established that lie and deny is your standard MO.

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

Do I prefer the caches in more interesting locations? Sure I do.

 

Then why not support placing caches in more interesting locations?

 

There are generally much more interesting locations in urban settings than mall parking lots, why not place caches there? That's what most of us are saying, just choose more interesting locations.

 

Translation: "just choose locations that are more interesting TO ME because my opinion is the only correct one."

 

Versus your opinion is the only right one?

 

No. Once again, I'm not the one trying to change the community to fit my liking. That would be you, or have you forgotten?

 

My OPINION is that everyone can have their OWN opinion. YOUR opinion is that everyone should share YOUR opinion.

 

Do you really not understand that? Because if you can honestly tell me you don't understand that, then there is no use talking to you and I will just put you on my ignore list as I might as well be talking to my dog.

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

And I predict you will eventually tire of complaining about things others like...

Ah, so you admit you like thoughtless, uninspired caches? You promote them? Think they are good for the hobby?

I'd say that your logic was flawed, but it doesn't appear that you used any.

Translation: "just choose locations that are more interesting TO ME because my opinion is the only correct one."

Versus your opinion is the only right one?

In your world when someone tells you that you should not have the right to limit the game for everyone, he is really saying that he wants to limit your play? Hmmm, I think your logic chip may have burned out.

 

Oh come on, sbell - don't you realize that my saying "don't force your opinion on everyone" is, in fact, forcing MY opinion on everyone???

[+Frammel Pie]

Dunno if anyone's said this yet since I just couldn't face digging through multiple posts and quotes-within quotes-within quotes-within quotes, but I don't geddit - so basically now that this subject has been beat like a dead horse, all that's left to do is argue pointlessly back and forth in a loosely-related way? Gotta love the internet and the barriers it removes, heh.

Edited June 14, 2006 by Frammel Pie

[CoyoteRed]

Are you really that obtuse or do you just act that way to get attention? There is a HUGE difference between you pretending to know what it's like to be disabled and my pretending to know about geocaching because you don't like my find count.

 

By the way, what you were DOING again was exactly what you said you weren't doing - citing my find count.

 

I don't really care anymore if you believe or not what I was getting at originally when I pointed to your profile. It's clear you are just bull-headed enough to only believe what you want to believe. Heck, I'll even admit I opened the door for you and others to believe it.

 

But, here, just to satisfy you, I am going to make it about your find count. You've only found 46 finds in 3 years. There. Satisfied?

 

BTW, it wasn't me you were responding to, just to point out you continually don't get your facts straight. Here, I'll quote you and link you seeings how you seem to get lost if I just link you.

Do you really think disabled people want to spend the rest of their geo-lifetimes going from parking lot lamp posts to 7-Eleven dumpsters and back? I think most disabled people would have their fill of Wal-mart parking lots after a while and what is wrong with giving them (and everyone else ) caches in interesting and/or appealing places.

Unless you yourself are disabled in some way, you have no idea what you're talking about, so quit trying to put yourself in their shoes...

 

But, let's pretend you were quoting me...

 

Okay, I have limited experience with limited mobility. I can't say I'm disabled as I don't have any permanent condition which limits my mobility. Nor do I have any condition that prevents me from getting out of the house. I have had injuries where my mobility has been limited and couldn't get around very well. I guess you could call it a "temporary disability," not to make light of any permanent condition one might have. In other words, there have been times where I couldn't do hikes in the woods--these just weren't on the table. So, I know what it's like to not be able to get out there. I also have relatives who have lost legs, been in leg casts for years, or quadriplegic. I've seen what they've gone through and what they've have to deal with.

 

Does my limited experience with limited mobility give me the right to opine about what it's like to be disabled any more or any less than your limited experience with geocaching gives you the right to tell others how to prepare for a cache outing?

 

I'll give you my answer first so you can't come back and claim I was thinking something else, but I'll hide it so you don't have to look at it until you've made your response:

 

V pbhyqa'g cergraq gb xabj jung vg'f yvxr gb or creznaragyl qvfnoyrq, abe jbhyq V qernz bs fnlvat jung bar pbhyq be pbhyqa'g qb. Vg qbrfa'g znggre gung V zvtug unir unq n grzcbenel gnfgr bs vg, V qvqa'g unir gb yvir jvgu vg. V jbhyqa'g qernz bs gryyvat fbzrbar "guvf vf ubj vg fubhyq or qbar." Jul? Zl yvzvgrq rkcrevrapr qbrfa'g tvir zr gur evtug nf V fvzcyl qba'g xabj. Whfg nf V srry lbhe yvzvgrq rkcrevrapr bs pnpuvat tvirf lbh yvzvgrq rkcrevrapr gb qenj hcba va beqre gb sbez na vasbezrq qrpvfvba ba ubj fbzrbar fubhyq cercner gurzfryirf sbe n trbpnpuvat bhgvat. Gung vf jung guvf uhooho vf nyy nobhg, evtug? Lbh bcvavat ba ubj vg fubhyq or qbar? Fubhyq V dhbgr lbh ntnva?

 

OGJ, juvyr V jnf ubooyvat nebhaq V jnf tynq V jnfa'g eryrtngrq gb Jny-zneg zvpebf nf sbyxf jrer gubhtugshy rabhtu gb unir cynprq gb 1/1 pnpurf jvgu zrevg. Guvf vf ba cbvag jvgu jung Oevna jnf gelvat gb fnl. Avpr rnfl 1/1 pnpurf qba'g unir gb or znyy cnexvat ybg zvpebf. Gurl pna or vagrerfgvat naq ragregnvavat pnpurf.

[CoyoteRed]

Hmmm....

 

Your opinion of you should be able to place caches anywhere you can get one listed regardless of its merit or entertainment value doesn't effect the hobby for me and everyone else? What, those caches just don't show up on my Nearest list or in my PQ? I don't have to waste my time one way or the other to filter that junk out?

 

Wow, glad that logic is working for you.

 

EDIT: forgot a punctuation mark.

Edited June 14, 2006 by CoyoteRed

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Do you really think disabled people want to spend the rest of their geo-lifetimes going from parking lot lamp posts to 7-Eleven dumpsters and back? I think most disabled people would have their fill of Wal-mart parking lots after a while and what is wrong with giving them (and everyone else ) caches in interesting and/or appealing places.

 

I can't speak for 'the disabled' but I can speak for me, having been disbled to some degree or other since '72.

 

I enjoy all caches. There are days when a 3-mile hike to the top of a mountain is not only possible but fun.

 

There are others when a lamp-post at WallyWorld is just the ticket.

 

Therefore I like the variety this game currently offers.

 

I don't ask folks to hide handicap-accessible caches, though I do appreciate it when they identify accessible caches as such (or the opposite).

 

Friends have hidden caches for me, like GCKEVQ. It's a fake leg hidden way the heck up a very steep mountain trail, an hour trek for the able-bodied, a six-hour ordeal for me - but I would be totally embarrassed if someone hid a lightpole micro for me!

 

So, yes, easy-access micros are valuable to us.

 

More valuable, however, is an easy access but high difficulty hide. A parking lot micro can be downright evil if the hider takes the time to make it so.

 

Some of the best caches I have ever found I could roll right up to in a wheelchair - that does not mean I can find them easily! We have hollowed-out bolts on retired train engines and in guardrails, fake pine cones, fake leaves on trees, all totally accessible but bugger bears to find.

 

Please don't confuse easy access with easy caches!

[+thedeadpirate]

Thank you AlabamaRambler. I think you just said what I have tried to say much better than I could have said it. (I hope that makes sense). And with that, I think that's all have have to say about that.

[+sbell111]

I don't really care anymore if you believe or not what I was getting at originally when I pointed to your profile. It's clear you are just bull-headed enough to only believe what you want to believe. Heck, I'll even admit I opened the door for you and others to believe it.

 

But, here, just to satisfy you, I am going to make it about your find count. You've only found 46 finds in 3 years. There. Satisfied?

...

Does my limited experience with limited mobility give me the right to opine about what it's like to be disabled any more or any less than your limited experience with geocaching gives you the right to tell others how to prepare for a cache outing?

 

I'll give you my answer first so you can't come back and claim I was thinking something else, but I'll hide it so you don't have to look at it until you've made your response:

 

<decrypted for your enjoyment, courtesy of sbell111> I couldn't pretend to know what it's like to be permanently disabled, nor would I dream of saying what one could or couldn't do. It doesn't matter that I might have had a temporary taste of it, I didn't have to live with it. I wouldn't dream of telling someone "this is how it should be done." Why? My limited experience doesn't give me the right as I simply don't know. Just as I feel your limited experience of caching gives you limited experience to draw upon in order to form an informed decision on how someone should prepare themselves for a geocaching outing. That is what this hubbub is all about, right? You opining on how it should be done? Should I quote you again?

 

BTW, while I was hobbling around I was glad I wasn't relegated to Wal-mart micros as folks were thoughtful enough to have placed to 1/1 caches with merit. This is on point with what Brian was trying to say. Nice easy 1/1 caches don't have to be mall parking lot micros. They can be interesting and entertaining caches.

CR, CR, CR, What will we do with you?

 

The strangest thing is that one would expect an inexperienced cacher to start a thread about junk caches and that an experienced cacher to pop in and explain how one could use the query process to get rid of caches that they likely would not enjoy. Your argument that one must have sufficient experience before you will listen to his/her advice is just too silly to contemplate. BTW, what is the magic number? How many caches must one find before they have sufficient experience? I think I'm up around 12 or 13 hundred finds. Am I sufficiently experienced?

 

Also, it is clear that your attachment to the handicap issue is an effort to minimize the other reasons that caches that you don't like are hidden. The most obvious is that many cachers like them.

[+The Jester]

And I predict you will eventually tire of complaining about things others like...

 

Ah, so you admit you like thoughtless, uninspired caches? You promote them? Think they are good for the hobby?

I like caches. I like them a lot. They are fun to hunt.

 

I like cache hiders. I like them a lot. They give me something to hunt.

 

Do I like "thoughtless, uninspired caches"? Sorry, I can't/won't judge the cache hiders thought processes or their inspiration level (I can and do admit it's different than mine, but I'm not forcing them to be me). I'll just enjoy another cache hunt. And THAT is good for the hobby!

[+gps_junky]

I don't care for micros, but who am I? I guess where I am at, there dosn't seem to be very many of em. I had a problem with a small cache that I placed. It was too close to the other cache across the road. 328' I decided to e-mail the owner of that cache and asked them if it would be alright if I was to move their cache a little further down the trail so I could hide mine. NO PROB. And as for the early discussion of CRAP CACHES, I hope that none of myne are "CRAP" Most of them are for an area for people to sit a spell, maybe a little lake with a public boat landing that isn't on any map. If this isn't right, let me know. And ONE MORE THING.... I want people to come to this area, if my crap cache is for the only reason, then so be it.

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

Hmmm....

 

Your opinion of you should be able to place caches anywhere you can get one listed regardless of its merit or entertainment value doesn't effect the hobby for me and everyone else?

 

No, not in the least. When you've found every cache there is to find and are left with nothing but what you consider lame, then come back with that argument. Until then, there are some 269,000 caches out there for you to find. Surely one of them is to your liking.

 

 

Wow, glad that logic is working for you.

 

Thanks. Works for just about everyone else, too, from the looks of things. 28,750 people logged caches in the last 7 days. There's about a half dozen of you here bitching about it.

 

EDIT: forgot a punctuation mark.

 

Among other things

[+ParrotRobAndCeCe]

V jbhyqa'g qernz bs gryyvat fbzrbar "guvf vf ubj vg fubhyq or qbar."

 

 

That is the funniest thing I've read in this forum to date. Thank you for the comic relief!

[Mushtang]

V jbhyqa'g qernz bs gryyvat fbzrbar "guvf vf ubj vg fubhyq or qbar."

 

 

That is the funniest thing I've read in this forum to date. Thank you for the comic relief!

 

No kidding. All he ever does is tell people "guvf vf ubj vg fubhyq or qbar."

[CoyoteRed]

V jbhyqa'g qernz bs gryyvat fbzrbar "guvf vf ubj vg fubhyq or qbar."

 

 

That is the funniest thing I've read in this forum to date. Thank you for the comic relief!

 

Glad to have obliged.