I'm dissapointed.

[+Mudfrog]

I bet that if Groundspeak took away the smiley count that this this behavior would fade away.

And those cachers would also fade away along with their revenue stream. Groundspeak won't let that happen.

What percentage do you think would quit? Would more quit than the number of people that are quitting because they think most caches are lame? If the quality of caches got better that would be good for business as well.

 

My personal opinion is that there are only a very few who really mean it when they say that they don't care about the smileys. Actually, i'm not sure why so many are afraid to admit that they like smileys when it's very obvious, by all these threads that pop up, that they do. I don't have any scientific data here of course but i figure that geocaching.com would lose one heck of alot of revenue if they took the stats away. This is a fun aspect of geocaching for alot of cachers and i think those cachers would soon find something else to occupy their time if these were taken away!

 

I still don't understand where all the angst comes from on the lame cache issue. I can look at the cache page, see the container size, the difficulty ratings, description, and the map to see what i'm up against. Yes, some cache descriptions are going to be misleading but the majority are gonna pretty much give you an idea what's in store for you if you decide to go for it. For instance, and this is my opinion: If i see it's a micro, then i'm already 90% or so sure that it's going to be a ho hum cache. If it really bothered me then i could just filter out these micros. Sure i would miss out on a few good caches but all that grief that i was spared would certainly make that acceptable.

 

I agree with most here in saying that i don't care for dumpsters, trashy areas, lamposts, guardrails, etc,,, but i sure don't go off the deep end and let it ruin my day when i do come across these.

[nonaeroterraqueous]

True, I don't think the caches behind supermarkets, next to the dumpster, surrounded by trash and grafitti are very good, granted, but after reading through this thread it occurs to me that if it weren't for the "see, I have a cache" caches, I'd have completely cached out my area already. As it is, things are already getting sparse. When a smoker can't have a cigarette he chews gum. When I can't get to a good cache, I go for an inferior one. It's not about the numbers. It's about staying active as a cacher and never having to run out. If I stop, then I feel like I'll lose interest. Having said that, I've gotten pretty burned-out on parkinglot micros. I guess it goes both ways for me.

[Mr.Yuck]

I'll agree that a cache next to a dumpster is no fun to find, but all caches behind shopping centers are not disgusting. Several times I found that caches behind shopping centers were hidden in nice, small picnic areas that probably were only known to the employees of the center.

 

Wow! Double Wow! The lame micro defense team must all be out caching this labor day weekend. This has to be one of the most unanimous "crappy cache threads" I've ever seen

 

So the post I'm quoting above. Nice small picnic areas known only to employees of the center. I'm sure it's nice for the employees, seing as it was provided by their employer, and of course is private property. There's a better chance I'll be struck by lightning as I'm typing this that the cache was placed there with permission.

 

Shopping centers are private property open to the public. I doubt that any of the caches hidden in the parking lots out front were placed with permission.

 

Correct. Or probably in 99.99999% of the cases. I've never understood how "open to the public" can be construed as it's OK to place a geocache there without asking for permission. And to address one of your later points up front, even though my post may seem like incoherent babbling about private property, The OP and CoAdmin were at one point discussing the parking lot and private property issue. I just can't quote everything

 

None of these picnic areas out back had no tresspassing signs or signs saying for employees only. They were as open to the public as the rest of the shopping center.

 

OK, I admit I'd need to know more about the cache in question. These could be "picnic areas" open to the public for consumption of food and the like. My assumption of employee break areas pretty much based on "known only to employees of the shopping center" I believe your quote was. So lets say it is the Wal-Mart Employee break area. Why in the world would they need to "Post" that?? Who would ever think "Gee, we'd better put posted signs on our employee break area, because some day, someone may leave an object there without our permission for the intention of playing a game, and invite the public to tresspass there 24/7 in the process"?

 

The employee break area where I work certainly isn't posted. This is because common sense would dicate that it is not open to the public!! But I guess people think they can just put a cache any place they want. And lie to the reviewers in the process, when checking those little boxes and hitting "submit".

[CoyoteRed]

I can look at the cache page, see the container size, the difficulty ratings, description, and the map to see what i'm up against.

 

I'm always hoping the hider found something worthwhile to show me.

 

In other words, you can't reliably pre-determine a cache's worth until you've done it simply from the cache descriptions. We've done plenty of caches that looked interesting from the cache page, but were let down in the end.

[+briansnat]

So now you have thousands of new cachers running around your towns trying to find "cool or unique" spots. Well, depending upon your local, and the cacher density - most of the cool or unique places are gone....

 

Lets say you live in a Suburban area. The handful of parks are saturated. The one museum in the area has a cache in front of it. What's left? Shopping centers

 

I really don't buy this argument. It may take some legwork, research, curiosity and imagination, but you can always find someplace worthwhile to put a cache. I live in one of the most densely "cached" states in the nation, yet I'm constantly amazed by the awesome places people come up with for caches.

 

Just this weekend I was in a local park that I thought was cache saturated, in a town that is pretty cache saturated. My wife and I saw a trail heading off into the woods and followed it, wondering where it led. After about quarter mile, we came to an abandoned RR bridge over a gorge with swift river flowing below it. A very nice and scenic spot. Right next to the bridge were some ruins dating back at least 150 years judging from the size of the trees growing out of them.

 

A quick check of the local maps showed that all this was withinin the park. The rest of the caches in the park were concentrated in at the other end. It was just our seeing a path, wondering where it went and following it that led to this area. I'm heading out this morning to set up a multi there.

[+sbell111]

I don't run into many of that kind of cache in my area (thankfully), but when I have, I make mention of it in my log, and post an SBA...

 

Jamie - NFA

You post an SBA just because you didn't like the location?

[+ThePropers]

I really don't buy this argument. It may take some legwork, research, curiosity and imagination, but you can always find someplace worthwhile to put a cache. I live in one of the most densely "cached" states in the nation, yet I'm constantly amazed by the awesome places people come up with for caches.

 

I dunno. That sounds like a lot of work, when there are perfectly good pine trees in parking lots to hang caches in. Sorry, but that comes from me finding 16 caches last week, 5 of which (yes, that's over 1/4) were in pine trees.

 

My theory is if the longest log you get for your cache is "Cache #6 today. Quick find. TFTC" then you have failed as a cacher and should be flogged in public at your next event cache. Or barring that, at least have to sit in the corner and think about what you've done.

 

I know there are people out there who like the quick C&D, but nobody could ever possibly place a cache like that and think to themselves that cachers are absolutely going to love it. Well, maybe there is someone out there who puts a magnetic keyholder on a guardrail behind the local quickie-mart, then grins to themselves the whole way home, lays awake at night tossing and turning and eagerly awaiting that "FTF. TFTC" log that might be waiting for them in the morning. Then when they finally get it they sit up straight in their computer chair, pat themselves on the back for a job well done and furiously type in www.walmart.com to see if there's a new store opening up soon while they eye up their stack of keyholders.

 

Of course, sometimes I wonder if it's a game to see who can run out and place a cache in the newest parking lot first. Some kindof sick contest or inside joke that I'm not a part of perhaps.

[+sbell111]

... However the sheer volume of these caches has mushroomed far beyond the percentage of cachers that can't walk a mile. It is a bit scary to me to witness the obsessive compulsive behavior over the numbers these days. The conversations while caching have gotten downright boring because that's all some people seem to talk about. I'm not a psychologist, but it amazes me, how many people seem to be prone to this behavior. So what is the root cause? ...

Perhaps the answer is simple. Maybe people hide caches that are similar to those that they enjoyed finding.

[+Mudfrog]

So now you have thousands of new cachers running around your towns trying to find "cool or unique" spots. Well, depending upon your local, and the cacher density - most of the cool or unique places are gone....

 

Lets say you live in a Suburban area. The handful of parks are saturated. The one museum in the area has a cache in front of it. What's left? Shopping centers

 

I really don't buy this argument. It may take some legwork, research, curiosity and imagination, but you can always find someplace worthwhile to put a cache. I live in one of the most densely "cached" states in the nation, yet I'm constantly amazed by the awesome places people come up with for caches.

 

Just this weekend I was in a local park that I thought was cache saturated, in a town that is pretty cache saturated. My wife and I saw a trail heading off into the woods and followed it, wondering where it led. After about quarter mile, we came to an abandoned RR bridge over a gorge with swift river flowing below it. A very nice and scenic spot. Right next to the bridge were some ruins dating back at least 150 years judging from the size of the trees growing out of them.

 

A quick check of the local maps showed that all this was withinin the park. The rest of the caches in the park were concentrated in at the other end. It was just our seeing a path, wondering where it went and following it that led to this area. I'm heading out this morning to set up a multi there.

 

There's no doubt that there are some great spots still out there to place good caches. But, they are definitely dwindling down and they are very hard to come across in alot of areas. I've lived here for 30+ years, i've studied maps, talked to people, and have done a whole lot of exploring. I'm sure there are a few spots that we just havn't found yet but for the most part, those interesting places are gone.

 

Of course we are always on the lookout because we do enjoy placing good caches. I can't imagine anyone enjoying a dumpster cache so we would never hide one. All i can figure is that the fun from getting that smiley overrides the repulsiveness of the cache hide and therefore makes it a good hide for some people. Numbers are what some cachers enjoy so these caches fit the bill nicely for them. It's not my thing but there's nothing wrong with someone else playing this way and i don't see why the angst shows up here because of this.

[+sbell111]

I can look at the cache page, see the container size, the difficulty ratings, description, and the map to see what i'm up against.

I'm always hoping the hider found something worthwhile to show me.

 

In other words, you can't reliably pre-determine a cache's worth until you've done it simply from the cache descriptions. We've done plenty of caches that looked interesting from the cache page, but were let down in the end.

On one hand you rant about the decreasing quality destroying the game while on the other you presume that all caches are good.

 

I don't know what to tell you, Sybil.

[+sbell111]

So now you have thousands of new cachers running around your towns trying to find "cool or unique" spots. Well, depending upon your local, and the cacher density - most of the cool or unique places are gone....

Lets say you live in a Suburban area. The handful of parks are saturated. The one museum in the area has a cache in front of it. What's left? Shopping centers

I really don't buy this argument. It may take some legwork, research, curiosity and imagination, but you can always find someplace worthwhile to put a cache. I live in one of the most densely "cached" states in the nation, yet I'm constantly amazed by the awesome places people come up with for caches. ...

You may not buy it, but it's pretty much how I feel about my town. My solution is to not hide any more caches (this dovetails nicely with my personal situation, but that's a different thread). I certainly don't fault others if they choose to hide them in 'B' or 'C' spots. Some of these spots will not excite me if I am looking to be wowed by every find, but I don't. This game is simply an opportunity for me to get away from real life for a little while. Occasionally, a cache will take me to some amazing place, but that is very rare. However, it is no more rare today than it was when I found my first cache over five years ago.

[+cachew nut]

The first cache was a bucket buried at the side of a road. It had a log book, some trade items and a can of beans. Except for not being buried or having food items, the game hasn't changed much.

 

Some people think that if there is no hike, than it isn't a geocache. Looking at the maps, it appears that the original was practically a drive up. I like hiking as much as the next guy, but I'm not sure where the hiking requirement came from. Or the woods, or the ammo box, or any other of the silly definitions people have for their image of geocaches.

 

Briansnat might have a trail outside his front door, so to him it may not be a geocache unless it's on a trail. Other people don't think it's a geocache unless it's hidden in the woods. Tell that to the people who live in this town. Sorry, but the film container more closely resembles a bucket than the ammo box does.

 

As for me, the game has always been about finding something that you hid, using my GPS. Not sure where all those other illusions come from.

[Mushtang]

I don't run into many of that kind of cache in my area (thankfully), but when I have, I make mention of it in my log, and post an SBA...

 

Jamie - NFA

You post an SBA just because you didn't like the location?

It sounds like another CR disciple that wants to drive something from existence that he doesn't like, because if he doesn't like it then everyone else would be better off without it.

 

[edit to remove personal attack by request]

Edited September 5, 2006 by Mushtang

[Mushtang]

As for me, the game has always been about finding something that you hid, using my GPS. Not sure where all those other illusions come from.

I totally agree. The thrill of finding something that most people don't know is there can be what the fun is. If it's a micro under a lamp post skirt, I'm still going to find it and log it because for that cache the fun is being in on a secret.

 

There are lots of things that can be part of a cache in addition to the secret (a nice view, a new place, a fun camo job, a tricky puzzle, a logging requirement, etc) but a cache is still fun to find just because it's there.

[+sbell111]

When I began caching, each cache was cool to me because someone that I never met or will meet hid it for me to find and the rest of the world is blissfully ignorant to it. Funny, that's still what I like about geocaching. For this reason, I get the same enjoyment out of a simple drive-up micro as I do from an ammo hidden under a pile of sticks; maybe more.

 

Edited to mention that I should have just paused a minute and let Mushtang make my post for me.

Edited September 5, 2006 by sbell111

[CoyoteRed]

Yep. "The Defenders O' Crap" have arrived.

[+cachew nut]

Yep. "The Defenders O' Crap" have arrived.

Go hide a cemetery cache.

[+sbell111]

Yep. "The Defenders O' Crap" have arrived.

I have an idea. Let's attack people who disagree with us. This tactic is certainly handy when we are ill equipped to debate a topic rationally.

Edited September 5, 2006 by sbell111

[CoyoteRed]

Yep. "The Defenders O' Crap" have arrived.

I have an idea. Let's attack people who disagree with us. This tactic is certainly handy when we are ill equipped to debate a topic rationally.

 

You might want to look at your own posts there, pal.

[CoyoteRed]

Yep. "The Defenders O' Crap" have arrived.

Go hide a cemetery cache.

 

I did just the other day. Thanks!

[+cachew nut]

Yep. "The Defenders O' Crap" have arrived.

Go hide a cemetery cache.

I did just the other day. Thanks!

I'm sure it's a lovely cache then. I don't care what anyone else may say about it. I'm sure it's just fine the way it is.

[+Moose Mob]

I am going to declare a cooling of period.

 

This thread closed until 10:00 Froggy time (Pacific).

[+Moose Mob]

There is plenty of opportunity for a good group discussion here. Keep it positive and productive and it will stay open.

[+sbell111]

Everyone should hide caches they would like to find and ignore caches that they would not like to find.

[+Quest Master]

As for me, the game has always been about finding something that you hid, using my GPS. Not sure where all those other illusions come from.

 

I got my illusions from here.

 

Geocaching is just like real estate - location, location, location!

Ultimately you'll want to place a cache in a place that is unique in some way. The big reward for geocachers, other than finding the cache itself, is the location. A prime camping spot, great viewpoint, unusual location, etc. are all good places to hide a cache.

 

These "illusions" were reinforced by the first cache I found and many that came after it. I hid my first cache and every cache on this very principle. It was expected. Sadly, this principle has been lost in a sea of rules (guidelines) and plenty of bad examples. Now it's being called an illusion. That's really disappointing.

[+tozainamboku]

I believe the OP's dissapointment was not that there were too many park 'n grabs vs. hiking caches, or even that many park 'n grabs were not in interesting locations, but rather that he has been finding many of these park 'n grabs in questionable locations. The example he gave was dumpsters in the rear of shopping centers. There is a lot of conern that such caches have the potential to

1. turn-off people from geocaching
   
2. get people in trouble looking in places where hunting for a cache could be seen as suspicious activity
   

In addition, most these caches rarely explicity state if permission was granted. This raise a question of whether reviewers should be more involved in ensuring adequate permission for caches in these locations.

 

I suspect that caches are hidden in these locations because they tend to last longer than in high muggle areas in front of shopping centers and that some cachers prefer looking where there are fewer muggles around. I would not suggest banning this sort of hides. If you are unconfortable looking for any cache, you should just abort your search. You can log a DNF expressing your concerns. It might get deleted, but then again, some hiders may take it as constructive criticism and will improve their next hide.

[+worldtraveler]

To start off with, this is not a rant against micros; it’s a rant against ill placed caches.

...This sport should have some standards honored by both the cache placers and the reviewers, or actually Groundspeak. We have rules against placing caches in sensitive areas. Even rules deciding what we can put in a cache. However we totally ignore the standards of a cache.

El Diablo

Welcome back, El D. I also agree with your OP, and the fact that the topic resurfaces and is hotly debated periodically (5/03, 12/04, 1/05 are a few examples) is evidence that it is important to many. In May, 2003 the topic was "lame caches", and I listed common characteristics of caches I considered lame at that time:

• Containers inadequate for their environment. If they can't protect the logbook & contents from the elements, they are trash-in-the-making. I've NEVER found a Gladware cache that wasn't ready for the trashbin.
  
• Lack of a decent logbook. Loose sheets (or scraps) of paper, or poorly bound logbooks are shoddy, IMO. Geocaching.com sells decent, durable logbooks. Buy them or something at least as good. If it's a microcache, consider using the letter & logsheet appropriate for the size.
  
• Trashy location. I'm up for a good challenge, and I don't mind getting dirty; but I don't like wading through heaps of trash and other refuse while searching for a cache. Even if the purpose of the cache is CITO, try to find a nice place for the cache.
  

When I find a cache with these characteristics, I get the impression (right or wrong) that the owner doesn't really care much about the sport or its participants, but has placed it primarily for his own ego gratification.

Three more years of geocaching has only reinforced my opinion. One thing that has changed during that time is the proportion of "bad" to "good" caches, if my experience is typical. Cheap, shoddy, ill-placed caches seem to be becoming the norm rather than the exception.

Edited September 5, 2006 by worldtraveler

[+Kabuthunk]

Apparently, I'm among the vast, vast, VAST minority of geocachers here.

 

So far, I've enjoyed all varieties of geocaches. It's apparent from what I'm reading in this topic that for the most part, people fit into a certain "type" of geocacher. Earlier, someone listed four types. Numbers, scenic, hike, and camo. They however forgot to mention a fifth group, of which I believe myself as well as others to be:

 

No clue how one would define it in fewer words, but the "Woah, I never knew that THIS was here" type cacher. I enjoy geocaching for the sake of finding things in places I never thought to find something before. I enjoy the find, not so much the journey, the swag, the numbers, or whatnot.

 

So don't go killing off those PNG's. For people like me, I get all excited and amused when I see that someone put something here, and think that like... of the hundreds or thousands of people that walk by... I bet there's all of maybe one or two of them that know this is here. It's the 'secret place' factor.

 

I don't really check beforehand if a cache is in a parking lot or in a forest or whatnot. I download some geocache .loc files for whatever are of town I'm wanting to cache in, and find however many I can in the area. I enjoy ALL of the caches so far, everything from the wooded areas to the light-pole caches.

 

Now, keep in mind that I'm still a newbie at this, so I'm sure everyone will be jumping at me saying "get more experience and you'll change" or "you don't know anything, you're too new", or some such... but until such time I change... I'm quite enjoying any and all finds I've come across :}

[+Mudfrog]

Yep. "The Defenders O' Crap" have arrived.

 

First off, i don't defend carp. Lame caches are here and they probably aren't going anywhere for a while. I too can't understand why people put some of these things out but on the other hand, it's such a minor issue in my life that i'm certainly not gonna let it bother me. Those of you who get all bent out of shape about these little things may need to take a break from geocaching, maybe think about finding another hobby, or if you sincerely think these things are causing this much grief, make an appointment with your psychiatrist!

 

This is nothing to get worked up about!

[+worldtraveler]

... Those of you who get all bent out of shape about these little things may need to take a break from geocaching...

Did you read the OP? He had taken a break from geocaching and was shocked by the changes he perceived had taken place in the interim. And his perception is shared by quite a number of others who have weighed in on the topic. I don't see how "taking a break from geocaching" will alter either the perception or the reality of the problem. No argument that this is a minor issue in the grand scheme of things, but it is a valid topic for discussion or even heated debate in this forum.

[+Mudfrog]

... Those of you who get all bent out of shape about these little things may need to take a break from geocaching...

Did you read the OP? He had taken a break from geocaching and was shocked by the changes he perceived had taken place in the interim. And his perception is shared by quite a number of others who have weighed in on the topic. I don't see how "taking a break from geocaching" will alter either the perception or the reality of the problem. No argument that this is a minor issue in the grand scheme of things, but it is a valid topic for discussion or even heated debate in this forum.

 

You are right. Taking a break won't help and in fact, in this case, seemed to make things worse. I'm just trying to point out that even though we may not care for how and where some caches are put out, they usually aren't anything to get upset over.

[+Moose Mob]

My mouse is hovering over the "close this topic" button. Please keep the tone a LOT more civil.

 

Thank you.

[+worldtraveler]

... but it is a valid topic for discussion or even heated debate in this forum.

<Self-moderation:> "...but it is a valid topic for 'a LOT more civil' discussion or even heated debate in this forum.

[+sbell111]

The problem with 'heated debate' on this topic is that it basically boils down to whether or not a person enjoys specific caches. No matter which side you come down on with individual caches, the thread can never possibly resolve anything. It merely exists for those who want the game to be only what they like to rant about changing it.

 

BTW, has anyone gotten anywhere with my 'yawning signal' smiley?

[+Hula Bum]

I don't completely agree. While I think those that have been around will stick with what they feel, I think that the newer crowd may think a little more about placing less than desirable caches after reading how much it stirs up. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd like to think that maybe it'll affect a few...

[+sbell111]

I guess it depends on whether you agree with the hypothesis that people place caches that they would enjoy finding.

[+KBI]

My mouse is hovering over the "close this topic" button. Please keep the tone a LOT more civil.

I'll give it a shot:

 

I would like to remind the complainer types of two things:

1. ALL cache hiders are VOLUNTEERS.
   
2. ALL cache hiders are AMATEURS.
   

Do you complain to the manager when you get a bland plate of food at a restaurant? You should. Do you post negative reviews on Amazon.com when you watch a lame DVD or read a novel that wasted your time? Absolutely you should. You're the customer. The customer is always right.

 

Should you whine when you discover that some of the geocaches you've been finding didn't quite live up to your standards of fun? Not at all. You're not a customer here -- you're a fellow participant. Sure, maybe you paid for a premium membership, but that money goes to the website, not the cache owner. Geocaching.com is merely the listing agent. It's the individual cache owner who designs the cache hide.

 

Will whining about growth in the number of so-called lame caches cause potential hiders of those caches to think twice? Maybe. (Probably not, actually, because if those hiders didn't care what you thought before, what makes you think threads like this will get their attention?)

 

One thing that whining about so-called lame caches WILL almost certainly do is cause certain potential hiders of future fun caches to hesitate. If I were a newbie, had only found a couple dozen caches, and had a great idea for a thoughtful and creative new hide, I can see how reading this very thread might scare me off from putting out the cache. "What of nobody likes my hide? What if I'll just be adding to the problem? Maybe I'll just stick to finding other people's hides instead."

 

[EDIT to observe that Hula Bum apparently had the same thought, and beat me to it]

 

No one ever promised that all caches will be fun. In fact, the enjoyment one gets from this hobby has a lot more to do with one's inner attitudes and motivations than with any specific type of existing or future hide method.

 

Those of you who are bitching about other volunteer, amateur, fellow participants' lack of inspiration should be ashamed of yourselves. If pointing that out is uncivil, then excuse me -- i can't think of any more diplomatic way to phrase it.

 

Whining that "sometimes I find caches that aren't fun" implies a lack of patience with your fellow man that indicates maybe Geocaching is not for you. Nothing wrong with that.

 

If my opinion makes me a "Defender O' Crap" then slap that D.O.C. badge on me!!

Edited September 5, 2006 by KBI

[+hikergps]

My opinion on sbell's theory is the same. If a cacher likes to find easier caches, that it what the cacher will place, and the same for cachers who enjoy harder to find caches. To add to that, because they are easier to find, one can assume that they are easier to hide. It is more likely that a cacher will be able to hide more easy caches in a day than a cacher hiding caches at the end of a long hike, drive, swim, whatever.

 

From the opinions expressed in the forums in general, most (not all) easy caches and disappointing caches (2 different things so don't flame me on that, not saying all easy caches are dissappointing) are placed for the sake of the numbers. It would make sense then that those striving for numbers, and not location, are the ones hiding the dissappointing caches and feeling good about it because they are helping those that need the numbers. My $0.02.

 

edit to add:

 

I like caching. Somedays I want a challenge. Some days I want a drive up. Somedays I don't feel like doing anything but sitting on my butt. I can choose what I want to find and do on any given day. I like KBI's remarks (didn't see them before I posted) about being a participant, not a customer.

Edited September 5, 2006 by hikergps

[+Hula Bum]

I guess it depends on whether you agree with the hypothesis that people place caches that they would enjoy finding.

 

In theory that sounds great, though I know it around here not to be true. We've got a handful of people that "love" to do our and others hiking caches, and then proceed to place micros in every parking lot available. They have the energy to find them, just seems they don't have that same energy to hide them. Course I think it also ties into numbers, they want to hide as many as possible and it takes a lot more time/work to actually go hike out and put one somewhere remote, or even think of a clever urban cache than to go around sticking film canisters in walls.

[+Wile E. Dragonfly]

A geo-friend of mine and her family went and found my most recent cache GCXPFE and had a great time. She emailed me privatly and said that her husband and kid now want to plan a tricky cache like mine and not the easy one that she had been planning (prior to finding mine). So, maybe my evil plan to fill the world with caches that "make you go hmmmm?" is working. I don't know, but it can't hurt. I personally like the ones that make you think or have particularly new and intersting way of hiding it - but then I also know that my hides don't get near the finds that the easy PNGs get. So, maybe the numbers vote for those... I don't care. I'll still only put out thoughtful and challenging caches and hope that others will follow suit. If not, it's not like I havn't led by example.

 

And, I personally like the ones that havn't been found in a while. They're a bit more private, a bit more special, a bit less of one of the many... Those are the ones I want to find! Hubby and I are planning a small trip this weekend to find a cache that hasn't been found since last November - mainly cause there is a 7 mile hike involved. Not being found in the summer is understandable, this is south Texas after all, but it is now getting cooler (at least this week) and is prime caching weather... time to post some finds on some lonely caches.

[+worldtraveler]

Okay, how about this as an idea for keeping the discussion civil and on-topic: Those who think this topic could/should lead to better cache-placing in general can list specific kinds of locations they think are inappropriate but not already addressed in the guidelines, along with their rationale for listing. Those who disagree with specific kinds of locations being included on the list should give their rationale for why they think that specific kind of location is a good one and should be permitted. The TPTB will then have the benefit of our vast store of calm, cool, rational opinions if/when they consider making any changes.

[+fizzymagic]

Everyone should hide caches they would like to find and ignore caches that they would not like to find.

So everyone should have psychic powers and know everything about the cache ahead of time, so that they can avoid those they don't like.

 

What a helpful suggestion.

[+worldtraveler]

Inappropriate place: trash heap

Is there a trash heap, pile of refuse, garbage, discarded construction material, etc. within twice the GPS accuracy radius of where you intend to hide the cache? If so, find another suitable spot farther away.

 

Rationale: You may not have hidden your cache in the trash heap, but we don't know that when we're searching for it; and multiplied cachers searching for it there will only scatter the trash further. Also, given the choice, does anyone really prefer looking for a cache in or around a trash heap?

edit - additional rationale:

Biohazards such as discarded hypodermic syringes, concealed lumber with protuding nails. Also, a non-cacher may decide to clean up the mess and inadvertently remove your cache, too.

Edited September 5, 2006 by worldtraveler

[+fizzymagic]

Inappropriate: Homeless encampment.

 

Is the area of the cache (within 50 m or so) regularly used by homeless people?

 

Rationale: Areas around homeless encampments frequently contain hazardous materials, including used hypodermic syringes and human feces. While you may not have seen anything hazardous while hiding your cache, it is pretty likely that seekers will run across it in their searches.

[+Hula Bum]

Hey, I did a cache like that not long ago, it was just lovely to go walking near someone's "home"....

[Clan Riffster]

Hula Bum, never argue with a man that has a brick coming out of his head.

[+Hula Bum]

LOL, that's funny. I was being sarcastic for those that hadn't figured it out! See Fizzy's picture shows the dangers of ill placed caches!

[+worldtraveler]

Inappropriate: functional birdhouses

Could the birdhouse really be used by a bird, or would it take a very close inspection to determine that it is not functional? If the answer is "yes" to either, don't use it.

 

Rationale: If a bird starts a family in your functional birdhouse, cache seekers could become home wreckers. If cache seekers need to get very close to your non-functional birdhouse to discover the difference, they could inadvertently disturb other legitimate birdhouses before investigating yours. They could also disturb legitimate birdhouses near other caches, based on their experience seeking yours.

[+3blackcats]

I agree with the idea of this thread...caches placed with little or no thought are tiresome and boring.

 

Let me shed some light on why some folks may place caches in less-desirable locations or even more mystifying to me, why some folks place less-desirable caches in desirable locations!

 

When I first got into geocaching there was a cache located on a hill near my house. No, I'm not going to name the cache OR the hill... The cache started getting DNFd and a local cacher started to complain on the cache page that the owner needed to maintain the cache or Admin needed to archive it.

 

Finally, Admin decided they had better archive this cache (which from what I can tell had been quite popular) so Poof! Away it went...

 

Now there is a cache up at the beautiful spot placed by whom? The cacher who had complained so loudly about the need for maintenance. Instead of a large container full of cool swag in this remote spot high atop a hill, there is now a decon container high up in the tree. When I asked this cacher why he yelled so loudly for the archiving of the popular cache his argument was that there was a great spot sitting there without a cache.

 

Although I'm not condoning such practices, maybe this will help 'splain why folks place questionable caches in even more questionable areas.

 

IMHO, cache saturation is like urban sprawl. Does every available square inch of available land need nes houss? Does every .1 mile need a cache?

 

Respectfully submitted...3bc

[+Lighteye]

I use a simple rule to hide my caches, "If they were filming a documentary about geocaching, would you want to take the filming crew to the cache. If the answer is no, find a better location."

 

Very astute statement there. Hope you don't mind if I borrow that one!