"Old school" caching: Cure for burnout?

[+drat19]

I have the same fear when I go into a Baskin-Robbins. I may miss some ice cream flavor that I would really like. I stick to chocolate and vanilla because some of the flavors may be really lame and never try any other flavors. What geocaching needs is not a cache rating system or a recommended caches list. What geocaching need is those little free sample scoops, so you can taste a cache before commiting to find it.

I think on your ice cream metaphor, you've violated Johnny Carson's old rule about pushing a joke past 3 references. <--Note the LOL - I'm teasing!

[+sbell111]

... What geocaching need is those little free sample scoops, so you can taste a cache before commiting to find it.

Isn't that what the logs are for?

[+sbell111]

Are you being argumentative again sbell? A favorites list is is not a guarantee. Just because a lot of people have really enjoyed doing these caches doesn't mean that everyone will. Have you ever heard of a "Bell" curve? You will only get average caches by doing random selection. I am talking about finding the upper end of the distribution. Also the fact that there is not a single lamp post cache on this list proves that the list does not include the bottom end of the distribution.

You are incorrect in your assertion that a random selection will result in an average cache. It will result in a random chance of getting a 'good' cache.

 

However, if the favorites list is put together by a cacher (or cachers) who do not like the same things as the user (like your list), it would have less than an average chance of returning 'good' caches.

Edited November 21, 2006 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

Are you being argumentative again sbell? A favorites list is is not a guarantee. Just because a lot of people have really enjoyed doing these caches doesn't mean that everyone will. Have you ever heard of a "Bell" curve? You will only get average caches by doing random selection. I am talking about finding the upper end of the distribution. Also the fact that there is not a single lamp post cache on this list proves that the list does not include the bottom end of the distribution.

You are incorrect in your assertion that a random selection will result in an average cache. It will result in a random chance of getting a 'good' cache. However, if the favorites list is put together by a cacher (or cachers) who do not like the same things as the user (like your list), it would have less than an average chance of returning 'good' caches.

The fallacy with your argument is that "most" cachers do like the caches like Forbidden Forest or Black Beard's Grotto! If you collected data from most cachers in the area on their favorites, you would data that shows that there are some caches that 70% of the cachers in the area have enjoyed so much it is one of their favorites. I'll take the odds on doing a cache that 70% of the cachers have enjoyed over a random guess anyday!

[+sbell111]

The fallacy with your argument is that "most" cachers do like the caches like Forbidden Forest or Black Beard's Grotto! If you collected data from most cachers in the area on their favorites, you would data that shows that there are some caches that 70% of the cachers in the area have enjoyed so much it is one of their favorites. I'll take the odds on doing a cache that 70% of the cachers have enjoyed over a random guess anyday!

I still am not sure that this is the right thread for this and I know that I have mentioned it in other threads which discussed ratings, but how does one know that he likes the same thing as everyone else in an area. This becomes an even harder question to answer when you consider that most of the time you would use lists like yours is when you are caching in an unfamiliar area (since you are likely to have already found the couple of dozen caches on the local list).

 

Either way, I don't see 'ratings' or 'favorite lists' as the best solution for burnout. Targeted searches and mind-set are much more important, in my opinion.

Edited November 21, 2006 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

You are incorrect in your assertion that a random selection will result in an average cache. It will result in a random chance of getting a 'good' cache.

Not true. If you look at a bell curve, 68% of the caches are within +/- 1 standard deviation of the average. So you will have an 68% change of finding the typical cache. I am defining good as greater than one standard deviation. Therefore, the odds of finding a "good" cache would only be ~16%. I want to find more good caches than 16% that when I go caching!

[+TrailGators]

Targeted searches and mind-set are much more important, in my opinion.

Tell me how to do an efficient targeted search without ruling out any cache types (dull knife method). Also tell me how to change my mindset, so I will get thrilled about lifting up another lamp post cover.

[+sbell111]

You are incorrect in your assertion that a random selection will result in an average cache. It will result in a random chance of getting a 'good' cache.

Not true. If you look at a bell curve, 68% of the caches are within +/- 1 standard deviation of the average. So you will have an 68% change of finding the typical cache. I am defining good as greater than one standard deviation. Therefore, the odds of finding a "good" cache would only be ~16%. I want to find more good caches than 16% that when I go caching!

I typically let Fizzy respond to any posts related to math, but you are making the assumption that caches fall into a normal distribution in their 'goodness'. Since everyone's definition of 'goodness' is different, I don't think that it is possible for this assumption to be true.

[+sbell111]

Targeted searches and mind-set are much more important, in my opinion.

Tell me how to do an efficient targeted search without ruling out any cache types (dull knife method). Also tell me how to change my mindset, so I will get thrilled about lifting up another lamp post cover.

First of all, the 'favorites' method misses many good caches, unless it is your position that there are only 54 good caches in the San Diego area. That being said, if you can decide what you don't like, you can target your PQs to minimize those types of caches. For instance, if I absolutely hated light pole micros, I would filter out 1/1 micros. This will leave me with a few light pole micros that are poorly rated and it will filter out some 1/1 micros that I would have enjoyed, but it would leave me with a honking big number of caches to hunt that would not be light pole micros.

 

The second half of your question is simple. It deals with what you expect out of geocaching. When I make sure that my expectation is that I will get away from life's stressors for a few hours, I am completely happy whether I am signing a log sitting next to a lake or standing next to a light pole. When my expectation is that I will always be wowed, by every cache that I look for, I am rarely satisfied.

[+D@nim@l]

 

It would be great to have a "new cacher" one-sheet that listed all the various cache types and what they involved. - something iconic and easy to read.

 

 

Great ideas LFD, here is my rough draft

 

[+TrailGators]

Targeted searches and mind-set are much more important, in my opinion.

Tell me how to do an efficient targeted search without ruling out any cache types (dull knife method). Also tell me how to change my mindset, so I will get thrilled about lifting up another lamp post cover.

First of all, the 'favorites' method misses many good caches, unless it is your position that there are only 54 good caches in the San Diego area.

My list is not automatically generated, it is "man"omatic. I do not have the time to read through 3000+ cache pages in the San Diego area to see which caches I may have missed. This is a much better job for a computer! But I think even that limited list is still useful and appreciated by many.

 

The second half of your question is simple. It deals with what you expect out of geocaching. When I make sure that my expectation is that I will get away from life's stressors for a few hours, I am completely happy whether I am signing a log sitting next to a lake or standing next to a light pole. When my expectation is that I will always be wowed, by every cache that I look for, I am rarely satisfied.

My expectation is to be taken somewhere I would not have gone had it not been for geocaching. So geocaching is an escape for me. I need the adventure to make it worthwhile. Finding the same kind of cache over and over in mundane locations doesn't reduce stress for me at all. It causes burnout!

[+tozainamboku]

Targeted searches and mind-set are much more important, in my opinion.

Tell me how to do an efficient targeted search without ruling out any cache types (dull knife method). Also tell me how to change my mindset, so I will get thrilled about lifting up another lamp post cover.

First of all, the 'favorites' method misses many good caches, unless it is your position that there are only 54 good caches in the San Diego area. That being said, if you can decide what you don't like, you can target your PQs to minimize those types of caches. For instance, if I absolutely hated light pole micros, I would filter out 1/1 micros. This will leave me with a few light pole micros that are poorly rated and it will filter out some 1/1 micros that I would have enjoyed, but it would leave me with a honking big number of caches to hunt that would not be light pole micros.

 

The second half of your question is simple. It deals with what you expect out of geocaching. When I make sure that my expectation is that I will get away from life's stressors for a few hours, I am completely happy whether I am signing a log sitting next to a lake or standing next to a light pole. When my expectation is that I will always be wowed, by every cache that I look for, I am rarely satisfied.

 

Here's my method: Based on threads about burn out and MicroSpew I expect the random distribution of caches to be similar to the red curve below. Even when I go to look for an ammo can in the woods, I expect to find one with no swag or just a bunch of broken McToys. I suspect however that the distribution is more like the blue curve. So most of the time I am not disappointed. I am really thankful for all of the threads in the forums. As there are more complaints about cache quality, my enjoyment when I find a cache goes up.

[+Blue Power Ranger]

 

It would be great to have a "new cacher" one-sheet that listed all the various cache types and what they involved. - something iconic and easy to read.

 

Great ideas LFD, here is my rough draft...

 

You forgot one

[+sbell111]

My list is not automatically generated, it is "man"omatic. I do not have the time to read through 3000+ cache pages in the San Diego area to see which caches I may have missed. This is a much better job for a computer! But I think even that limited list is still useful and appreciated by many.

I'm sorry, but I totally missed your point. BTW, how will your limited list be useful after the local cacher has found all 54 caches?

My expectation is to be taken somewhere I would not have gone had it not been for geocaching. So geocaching is an escape for me. I need the adventure to make it worthwhile. Finding the same kind of cache over and over in mundane locations doesn't reduce stress for me at all. It causes burnout!

I still get the adventure. I'm sure most of us find adventure in looking for items left for us by strangers among people who are clueless. Adventure, secret agent style.

[+TrailGators]

My list is not automatically generated, it is "man"omatic. I do not have the time to read through 3000+ cache pages in the San Diego area to see which caches I may have missed. This is a much better job for a computer! But I think even that limited list is still useful and appreciated by many.

I'm sorry, but I totally missed your point. BTW, how will your limited list be useful after the local cacher has found all 54 caches?

The SD Favorites list was created manually spending hours gathering everyone's favorites lists and making a single consolidated list. I keep trying to update it to add more caches as more people make lists and as new caches appear on those lists but it is a lot of work. I know you are trying to make it sound pointless to make such a list. But if somebody finds all those caches then they will be less burned out! Edited November 21, 2006 by TrailGators

[+sbell111]

<Duplicate post>

Edited November 21, 2006 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

My list is not automatically generated, it is "man"omatic. I do not have the time to read through 3000+ cache pages in the San Diego area to see which caches I may have missed. This is a much better job for a computer! But I think even that limited list is still useful and appreciated by many.

I'm sorry, but I totally missed your point. BTW, how will your limited list be useful after the local cacher has found all 54 caches?

The SD Favorites list was created manually spending hours gathering everyone's favorites lists and making a single consolidated list. I keep trying to update it to add more caches as more people make lists and as new caches appear on those lists but it is a lot of work. I know you are trying to make it sound pointless to make such a list. But if somebody finds all those caches then they will be less burned out!

I'm not sure that I agree. Again, once you find those 54 caches, how are you going to avoid burnout? Even if favorites lists work for you, it is a temporary fix, at best.

[+TrailGators]

My list is not automatically generated, it is "man"omatic. I do not have the time to read through 3000+ cache pages in the San Diego area to see which caches I may have missed. This is a much better job for a computer! But I think even that limited list is still useful and appreciated by many.

I'm sorry, but I totally missed your point. BTW, how will your limited list be useful after the local cacher has found all 54 caches?

The SD Favorites list was created manually spending hours gathering everyone's favorites lists and making a single consolidated list. I keep trying to update it to add more caches as more people make lists and as new caches appear on those lists but it is a lot of work. I know you are trying to make it sound pointless to make such a list. But if somebody finds all those caches then they will be less burned out!

I'm not sure that I agree. Again, once you find those 54 caches, how are you going to avoid burnout? Even if favorites lists work for you, it is a temporary fix, at best.

Did you read what I wrote: "I keep trying to update it to add more caches as more people make lists and as new caches appear on those lists but it is a lot of work." The hope is that GC will provide this functionality at some point down the road so we don't have to do it anymore....

[+BAMBOOZLE]

Remember Diff, Terrain, and APPEALING......

 

Instead of grading a cache which is subjective lets place it in a APPEALING group. Groups are A,B.C.D.E.

Each cache would go into the group it best fits....none being better or worse.

 

B. Micros Including lamp base, guard rail, telephone, etc.

 

D. Regulars off trail in wooded areas, etc.

 

A. Micros off the path...wooded areas, etc.

 

C. Urban regulars, etc

 

E. Cleverly hidden micros and regulars in unique containers, etc.

 

Add the APPEALING to the existing filters, download, and go for exactly (almost) what you want.

[+TrailGators]

Remember Diff, Terrain, and APPEALING......

 

Instead of grading a cache which is subjective lets place it in a APPEALING group. Groups are A,B.C.D.E.

Each cache would go into the group it best fits....none being better or worse.

B. Micros Including lamp base, guard rail, telephone, etc.

D. Regulars off trail in wooded areas, etc.

A. Micros off the path...wooded areas, etc.

C. Urban regulars, etc

E. Cleverly hidden micros and regulars in unique containers, etc.

Add the APPEALING to the existing filters, download, and go for exactly (almost) what you want.

 

The only difference between a "Favorites" list and the entire cache list is that many people said they really enjoyed these caches! So a "favorite" is not a grade! So just like any PQ list a favorites list can be downloaded and filtered by cache type, difficulty, terrain and attributes to suit the needs of each person. The advantage is that if you are feeling burned out, then you have a special list of caches available that will increase your odds of having an above average caching day.

[+sbell111]

Did you read what I wrote: "I keep trying to update it to add more caches as more people make lists and as new caches appear on those lists but it is a lot of work." The hope is that GC will provide this functionality at some point down the road so we don't have to do it anymore....

I read that. However, the reality of the situation is that each cacher still has to review the caches on the 'favorites' list to weed out those that they won't like. For instance, a specific cacher may not like long hikes or complicated puzzles, but those might end up on your 'favorites' list. Therefore, the list would have to grow faster than the cacher can find the 'good' caches on it. Eventually, it will either be unable to grow quick enough or it will become too large to sort through.

[+TrailGators]

Did you read what I wrote: "I keep trying to update it to add more caches as more people make lists and as new caches appear on those lists but it is a lot of work." The hope is that GC will provide this functionality at some point down the road so we don't have to do it anymore....

I read that. However, the reality of the situation is that each cacher still has to review the caches on the 'favorites' list to weed out those that they won't like. For instance, a specific cacher may not like long hikes or complicated puzzles, but those might end up on your 'favorites' list. Therefore, the list would have to grow faster than the cacher can find the 'good' caches on it. Eventually, it will either be unable to grow quick enough or it will become too large to sort through.

Again have you read my posts?

1) "So just like any PQ list a favorites list can be downloaded and filtered by cache type, difficulty, terrain and attributes to suit the needs of each person."

2) "The hope is that GC will provide this functionality at some point down the road so we don't have to do it anymore...."

[Not So Lost Puppies]

For me, it's simple. I try not to worry about what I missed. Only filter I use for PQ is for puzzles, because the cache is likely not at the posted coordinates. That's unfortunate, because "on location puzzles" are some of the caches I enjoy most. I don't worry about it, ignorance is bliss. I just try to make most of what I have. I can always make up for it by running a PQ with just puzzles, and try solving them on a rainy day.

 

Because we cache paperless, 99% of our caching is from PQs, generally without any filters at all for cache type/diff/terr/size.

 

I know we don't have anywhere near the numbers most of you have, [around 170 finds, 2 hides, 2 hosted events, 1 adopted cache since June 2005] some of that is because of other activities in our lives that are not caching. We certainly aren't in it for the numbers. Our biggest attraction to geocaching is seeing where it takes us. Sure, we've found some lame caches, in very uninteresting places. But in many cases we knew that before we got there and still did it. We often will do afew caches while on a trip, it really helps break up the drive for us, even if it adds some time for the trip.

 

If it is in an interesting place, we take time to enjoy it. It is amazing how many small parks are out in the world that you probably never would have even seen or even heard about if it wasn't for geocaching. You may never see it, or go to it again, but maybe you remember it. Maybe someday you are travelling with your family through that area and the kids are restless and you remember there was a little out of the way park, not marked along the main road, that would be a great stop to let the kids get out of the car and play. That is what we are in it for. And even "micro-spew" can fit in there sometimes. I am perfectly happy to find a 1d/2t ammo can in the woods if it brought be to an out of the way park. We take our time and enjoy the walk, read the infomational posts along the trail describing the plants in the area, or what happened there in history, etc. I'm also glad when we hunt a micro at a small town park or monument that we may have never decided to stop at before.

 

I don't forsee much of an issue of burnout for us, and that is probably because it isn't about the numbers. Even now during the new cachingplace quest, I am enjoying the caches I need to find to complete the game. Last games were also enjoyable, even when we did many (5-10) caches in a day and drove 100+ miles during that day.

 

I don't think it is so much about "Old school" caching vs micro-spew, I think it is more about WHY you geocache. sure, if its all about the rush to get the number racked up you are going to burn out pretty quickly, particularly if you aren't even paying attention to what is around you during the hunt. But if you cache because of the variety of places it can take you, I don't think burn out is going to be much of an issue.

[+sbell111]

Again have you read my posts?

1) "So just like any PQ list a favorites list can be downloaded and filtered by cache type, difficulty, terrain and attributes to suit the needs of each person."

2) "The hope is that GC will provide this functionality at some point down the road so we don't have to do it anymore...."

I read them, but we still have a disconnect somewhere.

 

First, let's assume that the purpose of the favorites list is so that everyone can have a way of looking for just the 'good' caches.

 

Now, given that we don't all like the same things, we will have to filter these favorites list to get what we like.

 

Very soon, that list will either not be big enough to return any results after filtering or will grow to a size that you may as well filter from the main body of caches.

 

Either way, 'favorites' list is not a long-term solution to this problem (if you agree with the premise that a problem exists).

[+TrailGators]

I need to keep reminding myself that some people will never get it!

[+sbell111]

I need to keep reminding myself that some people will never get it!

I'm not disagreeing just to be disagreeable. If I am missing something, let me know.

[Not So Lost Puppies]

I need to keep reminding myself that some people will never get it!

 

I think part of the point is that it is impossible to make any sort of list that will please everyone. ever. no matter how many people are involved in making the list. no matter how often you update it. The caches A doesn't like may be B's favorites. And particularly if you get someone from out of area, they may not like the types of hides that are most enjoyed by the other locals. I've heard that there are some cachers who actually enjoy the lamp post micros.

[+TrailGators]

I need to keep reminding myself that some people will never get it!

 

I think part of the point is that it is impossible to make any sort of list that will please everyone. ever. no matter how many people are involved in making the list. no matter how often you update it. The caches A doesn't like may be B's favorites. And particularly if you get someone from out of area, they may not like the types of hides that are most enjoyed by the other locals. I've heard that there are some cachers who actually enjoy the lamp post micros.

One thing you guys need to keep in mind is that you don't have to use the list!!!!

 

If I was traveling to another area I would love to have a list like that. Also if I want to do something different than the normal cache one weekend I can pull out the list. I still have many caches to find on the SD list. It seems short but it's really not! Anyhow, I agree that if you love lamp posts you don't need a list but don't deprive others of something that might be very nice to have!

 

Finally, most people that like lamp post micros now will eventually burn out on them! So show some compassion for those that already have burned out on them!

Edited November 21, 2006 by TrailGators

[+budd-rdc]

When I headed down to a Southern California event recently, I asked around to see what the locals would recommend, and I got plenty of advice (tried to write 'em all down). In fact, a "Mega Cacher" gave me a list of hiders to remember, which I thought was a great idea. I'll try to use the information next time I'm down there. There's no way I can "clear an area" down there without burning out.

 

In our local forums, we tend to direct outsiders to areas (Los Gatos Creek Trail, Almaden Quicksilver Park, etc.) instead of to specific caches. There are some individual caches we recommend, but they are usually epic adventures (multi-stage puzzles) or very evil.

[+TrailGators]

There are some individual caches we recommend, but they are usually epic adventures (multi-stage puzzles) or very evil.

I like evil caches! Some of our most evil caches are on the SD favorites! One thing nice about burnout is that I now enjoy doing multis much more than I used to. I have done three different 16 stage multis in the past few months. I used to blow those off because I only got one smiley for a whole days effort. Now I would rather do those kind of caches!

[+Harry Dolphin]

Burn out? That's the subject: Burn out.

Okay, so I have two cheap micros. (One was meant to be sarcastic, but no one ever noticed that.) My other two micros are very scenic, and fairly popular. And yes, I have some evil mystery caches. Those are mant fo the evil mystery cache finders. So, I'm not counting them, here.

I've found some 'all-day caches'. I usually find them quite rewarding (including the three that I found on a twelve-mile hike on the AT.) But my geocaching partner is not 'into/capable of' long, strenuous hikes. We like the half-mile, show-me-something-interesting caches. Or the micros that are well done, and show us something interesting. (Accolades to the new set of caches hiders in New York City!)

Where's the burn out, you are asking? I know some special places. I've put caches there to share my delight! Ten finds in one year. Ecstatic logs! Twenty-two finds in two and a half years. Not bad? Everyone loved it!

We spent a whole day putting out a five-stage mystery cache (The mystery only requires finding all four intermediary stages, and using basic math.) Great area. Great final stage. Our greatest achievement!! Our masterpiece!! There were four finds in August. None since. It's true that a hiking permit ($8 per year) is required. But the permit is good for twenty or thirty caches. About a mile hike each way.

Microspew: Three new caches. Magnetic caches on guardrails. (On my nearby list.) Five logs in three days.

That's the burn out. Why am I bothering? Okay, I've won an award form the local geocacher association (and may actually get it sometime.) May even be in the running for my multi or my mystery cache for this year. For ten finds a year, if that.

I'm burnt out.

[+kitkatt1960]

I have to admit that I have not read every reply in this list, but I feel that I MUST throw in my two cents worth.... even if you figure it ain't worth that much.

 

I have seen a massive upswing in the number of caches that are placed in the world. If my little corner of the world is any indication of the quality of the general cache, our hobby is in big trouble.

 

It seems to me that a lot of the caches being placed is just "because I can do it".

 

Originally there was an underlying current that the placed caches would be tied to one of the following:

1) A unique geophysical phenonomena..... like a cliff on the praries, or a prarie in the mountains...

2) A unique view of the area....top of the highest hill on a really flat plain....

3) A location with a unique piece of history attached to it.... Like the old location for a moved town or factory...or a farm ...or the first oil well in the country or whatever.....

 

When you found one of those caches you actually learned something.

 

Some of the multies of the "past era" even made you use the special features of your GPS.... like changes units of measure.... or varied datum to find secondary points....

 

You learned something on these..... you went to places that you usually did not go.... and you had fun, single or in teams... it didnt matter.....

 

Lately however the "I" generation has moved in.

I can place a cache....

I can put it somewhere that I can get to it easy.

I dont care if anyone else likes it

I am the only one that counts.

 

Well I am longing for the old days..... when you felt good that you found a cache, not the way that I feel now when I trip over poorly placed, or replaced caches, or in areas that are ecologically destroyed by cachers that dont take the time to walk around a flower bed to get to a cache.

 

I am sure that we all have one guy in the area that seems to have this thing about being the one with the most caches in the region.... JUST CUZ HE CAN. Well I have gotten to the point that I will not go out of my way to find a cache of his. If I trip over it when looking for someone elses, then I log it... but otherwise ....NO WAY. I will drive a hundred miles for an interesting cache before I will walk across the street for a bland one.

 

Well now I have to go for a 100 mile drive to find my next cache!

 

Have Fun... and enjoy... after all this is supposed to be a hobby!

[+sbell111]

<SNIP>

Edited November 22, 2006 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

Originally there was an underlying current that the placed caches would be tied to one of the following:

1) A unique geophysical phenonomena..... like a cliff on the praries, or a prarie in the mountains...

2) A unique view of the area....top of the highest hill on a really flat plain....

3) A location with a unique piece of history attached to it.... Like the old location for a moved town or factory...or a farm ...or the first oil well in the country or whatever.....

I couldn't agree more! It seems like that there are two factions: There are those in it for quantity and those that in it for quality.

[+drat19]

...Lots of salient points...

Wow, you summed up much of what I've been thinking perfectly (beyond my OP...). We're not alone on this.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

Originally there was an underlying current that the placed caches would be tied to one of the following:

1) A unique geophysical phenonomena..... like a cliff on the praries, or a prarie in the mountains...

2) A unique view of the area....top of the highest hill on a really flat plain....

3) A location with a unique piece of history attached to it.... Like the old location for a moved town or factory...or a farm ...or the first oil well in the country or whatever.....

I couldn't agree more! It seems like that there are two factions: There are those in it for quantity and those that in it for quality.

 

No, there are 3 factions. The third , like me, enjoy both quality and quanity. Maybe I need to get back to other hobbies I did before caching but caching is what I like to do ( and the only one my wife and I enjoy together).......for me to cache regularly , caches need to be there for me to find. Using the above criteria each city/area would have 5 or ten caches. After a few weekends ( unless I wanted to travel hundereds of miles) I could just sell my GPS on Ebay and move on to something else.

I will repeat, other than a few areas I have visited I have not seen a problem but a good general mix of caches and I think I have covered as much area as most anyone.

Most burnout is caused by things WE do or our specific approach to caching.

[+sbell111]

I couldn't agree more! It seems like that there are two factions: There are those in it for quantity and those that in it for quality.

I think that this is an oversimplification that does a disservice to the real issue.

 

As I discussed in another thread (or maybe this thread, who knows anymore), cachers do not fit easily into one bucket or another. We all fit somewhere along the continuum of what makes a 'good' cache 'good'.

[+TrailGators]

We all fit somewhere along the continuum of what makes a 'good' cache 'good'.

What the heck does that mean?

[Not So Lost Puppies]

Most burnout is caused by things WE do or our specific approach to caching.

 

I think that sums it up very well.

[+sbell111]

We all fit somewhere along the continuum of what makes a 'good' cache 'good'.

What the heck does that mean?

It means that we all like lots of stuff, some actually like long hikes and light pole caches. Some like puzzles, but not hikes. Some like micros and hikes, but not puzzles. Others like light poles and multis, but not hikes. Some like hikes and multis, but not puzzles. Some like only ammo boxes with long hikes and great scenery. Some never want to take a hike again because their Uncle Sugar made them take too darn many, but like really hard puzzles leading to easy finds. Some like really easy puzzles leading to wicked hides.

 

We're all different, you can't just chunk us all in one of two buckets.

[+TrailGators]

We're all different, you can't just chunk us all in one of two buckets.

My statement wasn't meant to be taken with such black&white thinking. Let's look at the facts:

1) There are hoards of cachers that are in it for the numbers. This is a fact. I've cached with them. If we don't find a cache every 15-20 minutes it bums them out.

2) These folks don't mind finding miles and miles of guardrail and lamp post caches. All of them I have cached with admit these caches are nothing special. But it doesn't matter because a cache is a cache.

3) There are folks that are not in it for the numbers.

 

I've never considered myself to be a numbers person, but sometimes I have cached with numbers people. I had fun with these people even though I really didn't enjoy the caches we were finding at all. But one day I hit a burnout point. That day I asked myself: "What the heck am I doing riding around in a car and lifting up lamp post covers all day? This is really stupid!"

 

So since that point, I have decided to focus my caching days on more unique and adventurous caches. If I can remember a cache a week later then that is a sign that it was a worthwhile cache. So now I make it a point to go out on scenic hikes or off-roading with non-numbers people or numbers people that aren't so caught up in numbers that they don't mind having a low numbers day. So I have gone to the next step past the burnout stage.

Edited November 22, 2006 by TrailGators

[+boda]

We're all different, you can't just chunk us all in one of two buckets.

My statement wasn't meant to be taken with such black&white thinking. Let's look at the facts:

1) There are hoards of cachers that are in it for the numbers. This is a fact. I've cached with them. If we don't find a cache every 15-20 minutes it bums them out.

2) These folks don't mind finding miles and miles of guardrail and lamp post caches. All of them I have cached with admit these caches are nothing special. But it doesn't matter because a cache is a cache.

3) There are folks that are not in it for the numbers.

 

I've never considered myself to be a numbers person, but sometimes I have cached with numbers people. I had fun with these people even though I really didn't enjoy the caches we were finding at all. But one day I hit a burnout point. That day I asked myself: "What the heck am I doing riding around in a car and lifting up lamp post covers all day? This is really stupid!"

 

So since that point, I have decided to focus my caching days on more unique and adventurous caches. If I can remember a cache a week later then that is a sign that it was a worthwhile cache. So now I make it a point to go out on scenic hikes or off-roading with non-numbers people or numbers people that aren't so caught up in numbers that they don't mind having a low numbers day. So I have gone to the next step past the burnout stage.

 

Great! I am not at the same point that you have reached, but I do understand where you are coming from. Also, I'm very happy that you are doing what you want to do.

 

However, the numbers folks are cachers too. The relentless comments by several posters in many threads, particularly anti micro or anti numbers posters, often show complete intolerance of other styles of caching. I don't understand that. Many people like many kinds of caches. I'm one of them. (BTW The closest caches to my house are LPCs that I haven't even tried to get; however, many do, and I may eventually get them as well.) More power to those cachers.

 

I agree with your quest for adventurous caches. I prefer them - but my sciatica holds me back a bit right now. I would still prefer to have a variety of caches available for all to find.

[+sbell111]

I'm not sure if this is on topic, but I just got back to the office from a long lunch. I had intended to go out and find a couple of the area caches. Instead, I drove past about eight cache locations. None of them really interested me, so I just came back to the office. I don't know what that says about me regarding your buckets. In my opinion, I just didn't have my head in the game. On another day, every one of those caches will be a blast.

[+budd-rdc]

I'm not sure if this is on topic, but I just got back to the office from a long lunch. I had intended to go out and find a couple of the area caches. Instead, I drove past about eight cache locations. None of them really interested me, so I just came back to the office. I don't know what that says about me regarding your buckets. In my opinion, I just didn't have my head in the game. On another day, every one of those caches will be a blast.

That's on topic. You experienced a burnout.

[+edscott]

Funny how a sport that is only 6 years old can have an "Old School" already. I think my method is the true "Old School" way of finding a spot in the woods.

[Not So Lost Puppies]

I'm not sure if this is on topic, but I just got back to the office from a long lunch. I had intended to go out and find a couple of the area caches. Instead, I drove past about eight cache locations. None of them really interested me, so I just came back to the office. I don't know what that says about me regarding your buckets. In my opinion, I just didn't have my head in the game. On another day, every one of those caches will be a blast.

 

I don't know that it is burnout, it may just be you weren't in the mood to go caching. I know that is almost blasphemy, but it does happen, even when they are caches where you would normally love to go.

 

Not any different than not being in the mood for your favorite dinner item.

[+TrailGators]

I'm not sure if this is on topic, but I just got back to the office from a long lunch. I had intended to go out and find a couple of the area caches. Instead, I drove past about eight cache locations. None of them really interested me, so I just came back to the office. I don't know what that says about me regarding your buckets. In my opinion, I just didn't have my head in the game. On another day, every one of those caches will be a blast.

I don't know that it is burnout, it may just be you weren't in the mood to go caching.

I think burnout starts with more and more days of not being in the mood for certain kinds of caches. It is definitely not a black and white transition. At some point, you will not be in the mood to ever do certain kinds of caches. I really think that it is too much of a good thing problem. Excessive amounts of anything will eventually burn you out.

[Not So Lost Puppies]

I'm not sure if this is on topic, but I just got back to the office from a long lunch. I had intended to go out and find a couple of the area caches. Instead, I drove past about eight cache locations. None of them really interested me, so I just came back to the office. I don't know what that says about me regarding your buckets. In my opinion, I just didn't have my head in the game. On another day, every one of those caches will be a blast.

I don't know that it is burnout, it may just be you weren't in the mood to go caching.

I think burnout starts with more and more days of not being in the mood for certain kinds of caches. It is definitely not a black and white transition. At some point, you will not be in the mood to ever do certain kinds of caches. I really think that it is too much of a good thing problem. Excessive amounts of anything will eventually burn you out.

And then possibly after some down time, you may be interested in it again. Or maybe not. Just like any other activity. Sometimes it is burnout, other times it is just deciding you don't want to participate anymore (which doesn't have to be burnout)

[+wimseyguy]

And then possibly after some down time, you may be interested in it again. Or maybe not. Just like any other activity. Sometimes it is burnout, other times it is just deciding you don't want to participate anymore (which doesn't have to be burnout)

Ya know, I still do not have any of those feelings towards hunting any kind of geocache, but I am making that decision about some of the threads in the forums more and more.

Anyone want some sweet potatoes?

[+TrailGators]

And then possibly after some down time, you may be interested in it again.

It will take an infinite amount of time for me to get excited about a lamp post cache again.... Edited November 22, 2006 by TrailGators