Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Snoogans

Common Misconceptions That Lead to ANGST!

Recommended Posts

If perceived lame lampost/guardrail micros represent the decline of geocaching, why do they STILL get approved for being within the guidelines? :D

Perhaps the reviewers are not allowed to decline a submitted hide based simply on the fact that it's lame? Reviewers are supposed to ensure a cache meets the current guidelines. They are not supposed to be quality control experts.

 

That's my point exactly. B) Quality is assigned by the individual.

 

We gain geocaching experience through participation in the activity. As we progress we find examples of what we individually percieve as good caches, exceptional caches, indifferent caches, and bad caches.

 

I live mostly in SW Houston & part time in Mammoth Lakes, in the Eastern High Sierra. Both regions have mostly good to exceptional caches in my perception, so my perception of quality should be rather snooty compared to what I've found in other parts of the country. It's not.

 

Just because my perception of cache quality is very high doesn't mean others need to cater to me for me to enjoy myself geocaching. Instead, I pick and choose my geocaching experiences to enhance my aesthetic rather than caching willy nilly in a way that might detract from it.

 

The guidlines exist to make sure that an equal amount of oversight has taken place before listing.

 

A cache is a cache is a cache for listing purposes. Cache quality is intrinsic to the individual experience. That's how a guardrail micro can be equal to a cache with beautiful mountain top vista. It's just another smiley and YOUR smiles have no value except what you place on them, but when others look over your fence and try to assign a value to what is essentially just a collection of individual experiences rather than an actual recognized score, the angstyness isn't far behind. :huh:

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post
If perceived lame lampost/guardrail micros represent the decline of geocaching, why do they STILL get approved for being within the guidelines? :D

Perhaps the reviewers are not allowed to decline a submitted hide based simply on the fact that it's lame? Reviewers are supposed to ensure a cache meets the current guidelines. They are not supposed to be quality control experts.

 

Despite personal beliefs and attitudes I am sure Reviewers sometimes have to hold their nose and hit the approve button to publish caches they do not like.

 

But it's all subjective. I might like the cache that he hates to have to publish!

 

One of the most fun caching days I remember was doing a series in Nashville that was all, or almost all, film cans velcroed onto signs around the UT campus. Dozens of them. Heck, you could see most of them while driving down the street!

 

Still, it was a fun day, seven of us bouncing all over the campus, seeing, dicovering, learning and having a great time.

 

I came away from it with a lot more knowledge about UT than I would have oterwise.

 

Yet I am sure these would be adjudged by some to be the lamest of the lame, and I am also sure the Reviewer had to hold his nose to publish them (at least many Reviewers would).

 

So here's a series that is enjoyable, judging by the found logs lots of folks liked them, that would be thouroughly rejected by many and their very existance decried in the forum.

 

That's where angst comes from! I like what you don't like and you think I am degrading your game. Nothing to do put post!

 

Ed

Share this post


Link to post

Contrary to popular belief, there is no UT campus in Nashville. That was a fairly unknown little college called Vanderbilt University. :D

Share this post


Link to post

Contrary to popular belief, there is no UT campus in Nashville. That was a fairly unknown little college called Vanderbilt University. :D

OOps! Thanks!

 

Guess my line about "I came away from it with a lot more knowledge about UT than I would have oterwise" is gonna be hard for folks to buy! B)

 

Ed

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler

Share this post


Link to post

What was that called in the 'Bambi' movie? The Thumper rule?

"If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all"

 

It is nice to see someone who thinks before he types. I have seen what negative posts can do. A cache is hid so the hider feels like a part of the hobby. When someone with some idea claims the cache is "lame" or "unchallenging" to them and leaves the negative comments (My dog really hates these caches), what must the hider think. I feel it really hurts the hobby. The above comment really somes it up.

 

bow.gif

Share this post


Link to post

What was that called in the 'Bambi' movie? The Thumper rule?

"If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all"

 

It is nice to see someone who thinks before he types. I have seen what negative posts can do. A cache is hid so the hider feels like a part of the hobby. When someone with some idea claims the cache is "lame" or "unchallenging" to them and leaves the negative comments (My dog really hates these caches), what must the hider think. I feel it really hurts the hobby. The above comment really somes it up.

 

bow.gif

That, combined with an attitude of "assume goodwill" on the part of the post reader. If one assumes that the other is intending goodwill, then it's easier to go back and re-read a post in a much lest angst-y tone.

 

That doesn't preclude criticism or negative logs or negative comments about certain types of caches, just brings with it the interpretation that the post writer was speaking towards the good of the game, not the bad of the hider/finder/whatever.

Share this post


Link to post

I expect disagreements and sometimes angst in any social activity. Yes, Geocaching is a social activity, since a hider is interacting with a finder, a different person, hopefully. B)

 

I think Carleenp's thoughts on Internet interactions is very important. I agree with others who have said that Groundspeak forums are civilized compared to other online forums. That's because in most cases, we are arguing for a common goal, to try to improve the Geocaching experience as how one sees fit (the perception).

 

What's annoying is things like excess sarcasm, and angst for the sake of winning an argument instead of looking for a solution. I'm not going to even mention abusive use of sock puppets (which I consider to be Information Terrorism) which totally distorts things to the untrained eyes and ears. :D

Edited by budd-rdc

Share this post


Link to post

Contrary to popular belief, there is no UT campus in Nashville. That was a fairly unknown little college called Vanderbilt University. :D

[OT on]

You beat me to the keyboard. I went to that little college. Go 'Dores! UT was 'the enemy' over in Knoxville; my dad used to boast that he wouldn't let us drink orange juice. :huh:

 

But I grew up in Bama, the land of Roll Tide and War Eagle. I'm just glad he knows there is a college in Nashville. B)

[/OT off]

Share this post


Link to post
If my opinion/perception changes to what many "seasoned" geocachers feel, I will quit geocaching and move on to another hobby. No sense in doing something "for fun" when all it does is pisses you off and stresses you out.
That's why I quit playing golf! Now instead of finding my ball in the bushes, trees and rocks; I am finding caches in the bushes, trees and rocks! :(

Hey, its the best of both worlds. You hit your ball into the woods, get out your GPS, go find a cache, take an old used golf ball out of it, swear it was yours, and play on. Looky there! You bettered your golf score AND "improved" a cache!

:(:mad:

 

Expectations: They will never be fully met in any endeavour. If this is the source of one's angst, one is indeed in for a rough life. Ya just gotta learn to "roll". Ya gotta learn to take a fall gracefully and get up to fight again.

 

Someone said,"The winner is the one who gets up one more time."

 

Re lamppost approvals:

The only guideline violation I can see in the typical lamppost micro MIGHT be the private property/p********n issue. The ONLY valid guideline question is, does the hider have "adequate" p********n?

Share this post


Link to post

To summarize our "Geocaching Tree of Angst" so far we have an atmosphere rich with CO2 that is represented by one atom of "Entitlement" ( C ) and two atoms of "Expectation." (O2) :huh:

 

We have a rich medium for the growth of angst in our soil which is represented by a common/general, "unawareness that this hobby is intrinsically linked to other people." :(

 

The roots of our tree are based in actual participation and experience in geocaching as an activity.... Hiding, finding, & moving trackables. :laughing:

 

The water that nourishes the tree is negative interaction whether actual or perceived. ;)

 

The trunk of our tree emerges over time. It is actually just individual experience that expresses itself in this way, "I know better than YOU what geocaching is supposed/intended to be all about." :laughing:

 

From there our "Tree of Angst" branches out in many directions. Some branches sprout from the trunk and some branches think they are attacking the trunk from the other side, but are seemingly unaware that they are part of the same tree. ;)

 

We have identified one branch of the tree as, "The Theory of Geocaching Evolution." B):o

 

There are many more to identify...... I wish I was all artsy. I would have made a graphic to go with this summary. Anyone wanna take a stab at it?

 

It must be winter, because there are no leaves on our tree as yet. :laughing:

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post
What are the rules in Geocaching?

 

Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple:

 

1. Take something from the cache

 

2. Leave something in the cache

 

3. Write about it in the logbook

 

Where you place a cache is up to you.

 

What about this important tidbit that you left out?

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/hiding.aspx

 

Step 1 - Research a cache location

Geocaching is just like real estate - location, location, location! When thinking about where to place a cache, keep these things in mind:

 

You are ultimately responsible for the cache so make sure you know the rules for the area where your cache is being placed.

 

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.

 

A micro underneath a lamppost cover does not a geocache make.

Share this post


Link to post

A micro underneath a lamppost cover does not a geocache make.

 

Then why pray tell do they keep getting approved? Could it BE that geocaching is really just high tech hide and seek and your perception of what a geocaching is has evolved?

 

Your perception of geocaching does NOT invalidate another person's attempt to participate. :laughing:

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post

One of the most common misconceptions espoused by a vocal minority is that all caches have an equal value. BillyBobNosePicker's film canister tossed behind a dumpster at Burger King is somehow equal to an ammo can sitting at the top of Stone Mountain, other than differences in difficulty & terrain.

 

This is true because they each count the same . . . one :laughing: smiley.

 

If we elevate the value of the percieved better cache (more smilies), perhaps they might be placed & sought more often. It would certainly lead to change in a direction that pleases some of the more vocal posters. :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post
One of the most common misconceptions espoused by a vocal minority is that all caches have an equal value. BillyBobNosePicker's film canister tossed behind a dumpster at Burger King is somehow equal to an ammo can sitting at the top of Stone Mountain, other than differences in difficulty & terrain.
This is true because they each count the same . . . one :laughing: smiley.

 

If we elevate the value of the percieved better cache (more smilies), perhaps they might be placed & sought more often. It would certainly lead to change in a direction that pleases some of the more vocal posters. :laughing:

On the other hand, many people have absolutely no interest in climbing a mountain to find a cache (or any other reason). Those are just not any fun for those people. Perhaps, those types of caches should only be worth 1/2 of a smiley.

 

:laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

My angst is the difficulty and terrain ratings. But everyone's sense of what is difficult and their perception of the terrain is different, so what are you gonna do? Expect the worst I guess. When I log a find I like to mention whether I feel it's kid friendly or not.

Share this post


Link to post

If the cache has swag that "lights up" the eyes of my grandkids......then I am definitely

out of the "angst zone".

 

It has taken me many years to be able to think so "deeply"!! :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

To summarize our "Geocaching Tree of Angst" so far we have an atmosphere rich with CO2 that is represented by one atom of "Entitlement" ( C ) and two atoms of "Expectation." (O2) :ph34r:

 

We have a rich medium for the growth of angst in our soil which is represented by a common/general, "unawareness that this hobby is intrinsically linked to other people." :(

 

The roots of our tree are based in actual participation and experience in geocaching as an activity.... Hiding, finding, & moving trackables. :(

 

The water that nourishes the tree is negative interaction whether actual or perceived. :(

 

The trunk of our tree emerges over time. It is actually just individual experience that expresses itself in this way, "I know better than YOU what geocaching is supposed/intended to be all about." :(

 

From there our "Tree of Angst" branches out in many directions. Some branches sprout from the trunk and some branches think they are attacking the trunk from the other side, but are seemingly unaware that they are part of the same tree. :(

 

We have identified one branch of the tree as, "The Theory of Geocaching Evolution." :tired::(

 

There are many more to identify...... I wish I was all artsy. I would have made a graphic to go with this summary. Anyone wanna take a stab at it?

 

It must be winter, because there are no leaves on our tree as yet. :(

 

BTW- I got an email the other day from a friend of mine who wanted to express that he felt that this thread (slanted or not) represented a clear voice of reason. Many of you might recognize him by his Hugh Jass, but he really has another geonick. He can't speak for himself because of double secret bannination. :(

 

I appreciated the compliment. :)

 

I'm not much of a chess player, but I believe that the way that this discussion has been presented has put a great many well known forum ideologies in check. It is evident by the fact that many of those most known to stand on their geocaching ideology have barely graced this thread.

 

I enjoy a good debate and welcome them to join in the discussion. Everyone's ideology is valid to them and disagreements can lead to greater understanding on both sides. :)

Share this post


Link to post

A micro underneath a lamppost cover does not a geocache make.

 

Then why pray tell do they keep getting approved? Could it BE that geocaching is really just high tech hide and seek and your perception of what a geocaching is has evolved.

 

Your perception of geocaching does NOT invalidate another person's attempt to participate. :tired:

 

Because geocaching has involved into two groups, the "in it for the numbers" crowd, and the more traditional, "in it for the adventure" group. Geocaching would be more fun for me, if remote caches, with higher terrain ratings were "worth more."

 

 

You still didn't address the importance of cache location, as stated here.

 

Will it be easy to get to? - If it is only a couple hundred feet from the highway, there's a strong chance someone may plunder it. Try to find a place that will take a bit of time to get to, preferably on foot.

 

Will it be easy to find? - If it is too visible, or too close to busy roads, trails, etc. there's a good chance someone may stumble upon it. Several of the original caches were discovered this way, but the people who found it were nice enough to leave them there (or participate). But don't make it too difficult! If you hide it well, give hints on geocaching.com as to the location.

 

Will it be on private or public land? - If you place it on private land, please ask permission before putting it there! If you place the cache on public lands you need to contact the managing agency to find out about their rules. You will be in violation of federal regulation by placing a cache in any area administered by the National Park Service (US). The National Park regulations are intended to protect the fragile environment, and historical and cultural areas found in the parks.

 

99% of parking lot micros are hidden without permission from the property owners.

 

Will it cause unnecessary concern? - Please use common sense when choosing a location for your cache. Do not place your cache in any location where it might be confused with something more dangerous.

Does it meet requirements to be listed on the site? - Make sure to review the guidelines for listing a geocache on this web site during your research.

Edited by Kit Fox

Share this post


Link to post
Because geocaching has involved into two groups, the "in it for the numbers" crowd, and the more traditional, "in it for the adventure" group. Geocaching would be more fun for me, if remote caches, with higher terrain ratings were "worth more." ...
I disagree with your premise that geocachers fit into your two groups.

Share this post


Link to post

Because geocaching has involved into two groups, the "in it for the numbers" crowd, and the more traditional, "in it for the adventure" group. Geocaching would be more fun for me, if remote caches, with higher terrain ratings were "worth more."

I don't see any need to limit it to two groups. There are many reasons why people go geocaching and different people enjoy different things. I'm not sure if any reason is more "traditional", although I do suspect that the early adopters of geocaching tended to be the more adventurous type.

 

You still didn't address the importance of cache location, as stated here.

Those are suggestions for placing caches and were probably written with Jeremy's biases. They provide a good set of issues that you should consider when hiding caches. They don't rule out urban hides. A lot of this has to do with how likely a cache is to get muggled. A lot of the so-called lame urban hides don't last very long - gardeners and maintenance crews find them and throw them away like any other trash. I agree that placing a cache where it could cause undo concern that it may be a bomb or even someone's drug stash is not a good idea. And I agree that the guidelines require "adequate permission". The checkbox that states you read and understood the guidelines when you submit a cache is, in most cases, the only indication that the reviewer has that you have "adequate permission".

 

99% of parking lot micros are hidden without permission from the property owners.

You made up this statistic. I use to be naive and believe that parking lot caches were hidden either by an employee as the store or by a frequent customer who wouldn't have trouble asking permission of the store manager before hiding the cache. This I've found is not always true. But I suspect that it is for more than 1%. It might be that most parking lot micros are placed without getting permission, but some definitely do get permission. Perhaps the reviewers prefer to give the benefit of the doubt to the hider. I still naively think that caches placed in church parking lots are placed by members of that congregation with permission of the clergy or other authority. But I may be wrong here too.

Edited by tozainamboku

Share this post


Link to post

 

99% of parking lot micros are hidden without permission from the property owners.

You made up this statistic. I use to be naive and believe that parking lot caches were hidden either by an employee as the store or by a frequent customer who wouldn't have trouble asking permission of the store manager before hiding the cache. This I've found is not always true. But I suspect that it is for more than 1%.

 

As Mr. T said, you'd never be able to prove that statistic to be accurate (although I'll bet it is :tired::ph34r:) But an excellent point, none the less. How much longer are reviewers going to look the other way and hit publish for caches that have obviously been hidden on private property without permission? Like this very recent black eye for our hobby.

Share this post


Link to post

My angst is the difficulty and terrain ratings. But everyone's sense of what is difficult and their perception of the terrain is different, so what are you gonna do? Expect the worst I guess. When I log a find I like to mention whether I feel it's kid friendly or not.

Those ratings are somewhat subjective, but there's no harm in posting in the logs what you think they should be... but usually after you find the cache. Snoogans (the OP) have said in the past that it's better they are overrated so people are prepared.

 

And I'll show my angst a little... LAMP POST MICROS ARE NOT 1 STAR DIFFICULTY. They should be at minimum, 1.5 stars, because they are hidden out of sight. People who consider them 1 stars probably don't rely on difficulty/terrain anyway. That goes along with one of the themes in this thread...

 

Not realizing one's change of perception, or "taking things for granted" is a common cause for needless angst. :tired:

Share this post


Link to post
Those are suggestions for placing caches and were probably written with Jeremy's biases. They provide a good set of issues that you should consider when hiding caches. They don't rule out urban hides.

Jeremy probably recognized that this game would be embraced by all types, including those who rode the short bus to school. the, uh, shall we say, less inspired? :tired: As such, he didn't want to write a guideline prohibiting carpy film canister behind a dumpster hides, hide-a-key's slapped onto guardrails or the oh-so-clever lamp post skirt hide. When you run a business that supplies something to the general public, you often find yourself producing for the lowest common denominator.

 

Now, where did that "I hate ammo cans" thread go? :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

 

99% of parking lot micros are hidden without permission from the property owners.

You made up this statistic. I use to be naive and believe that parking lot caches were hidden either by an employee as the store or by a frequent customer who wouldn't have trouble asking permission of the store manager before hiding the cache. This I've found is not always true. But I suspect that it is for more than 1%.

 

As Mr. T said, you'd never be able to prove that statistic to be accurate (although I'll bet it is :tired::ph34r:) But an excellent point, none the less. How much longer are reviewers going to look the other way and hit publish for caches that have obviously been hidden on private property without permission? Like this very recent black eye for our hobby.

Bah... statistics don't publish themselves... "numbers don't kill people... people do." :(

 

I've seen angst from hiders caused by reviewers rejecting caches due to not-so-clear private property issues, like a lampost just a few feet inside an establishment's parking lot, etc. I've heard a reviewer say that unless it's a CLEAR violation, he just holds his nose and hits the publish button, because he assumes in good faith that the hider has read the guidelines.... another issue for angst. :(

 

I think this is the case where the participants are increasing becoming ignorant. Whether that's due to lack of education or from arrogance, we don't know... but freedom requires responsibility ("not free") and it rests with the hider.

Share this post


Link to post

 

99% of parking lot micros are hidden without permission from the property owners.

You made up this statistic. I use to be naive and believe that parking lot caches were hidden either by an employee as the store or by a frequent customer who wouldn't have trouble asking permission of the store manager before hiding the cache. This I've found is not always true. But I suspect that it is for more than 1%. It might be that most parking lot micros are placed without getting permission, but some definitely do get permission. Perhaps the reviewers prefer to give the benefit of the doubt to the hider. I still naively think that caches placed in church parking lots are placed by members of that congregation with permission of the clergy or other authority. But I may be wrong here too.

 

I'm willing to wager that most property owners would not approve geocaches in their parking lots. The cost to insure said property, as well as the shock risk with lamppost caches, would cause most owners to decline approval.

 

Bah... statistics don't publish themselves... "numbers don't kill people... people do." :tired:

 

I've seen angst from hiders caused by reviewers rejecting caches due to not-so-clear private property issues, like a lampost just a few feet inside an establishment's parking lot, etc. I've heard a reviewer say that unless it's a CLEAR violation, he just holds his nose and hits the publish button, because he assumes in good faith that the hider has read the guidelines.... another issue for angst. :ph34r:

 

I think this is the case where the participants are increasing becoming ignorant. Whether that's due to lack of education or from arrogance, we don't know... but freedom requires responsibility ("not free") and it rests with the hider.

 

I did make up the statistic, but i'm willing to bet the percentange is close. I think the majority of confrontations between geocachers, and the general public is because of caches being placed in full view of the public, and on private property sans permission.

 

How often does the bomb squad get called on geocaches located on National Forest Land. Most caches that get blown up are in a high visibility, urban setting. On rare occasions, caches with permission get blown up.

 

I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."

 

It's too bad, that some reviewers hold their nose and assume that caches placed in parking lots, have permission, yet they won't approve a cache without specific permission, if it is on land fostered by land managers.

 

I understand "doing the right thing" to foster good will, and good working relations with land managers, but why is this ignored on urban caches?

Edited by Kit Fox

Share this post


Link to post
... And I'll show my angst a little... LAMP POST MICROS ARE NOT 1 STAR DIFFICULTY. They should be at minimum, 1.5 stars, because they are hidden out of sight. People who consider them 1 stars probably don't rely on difficulty/terrain anyway. That goes along with one of the themes in this thread...
Based on Clayjar's tool. lamp post micros should be a difficulty of one, in my opinion. According to the tool, it would be a one if it is 'in plain sight or location is fairly obvious'.

Share this post


Link to post
... And I'll show my angst a little... LAMP POST MICROS ARE NOT 1 STAR DIFFICULTY. They should be at minimum, 1.5 stars, because they are hidden out of sight. People who consider them 1 stars probably don't rely on difficulty/terrain anyway. That goes along with one of the themes in this thread...
Based on Clayjar's tool. lamp post micros should be a difficulty of one, in my opinion. According to the tool, it would be a one if it is 'in plain sight or location is fairly obvious'.

I use Clayjar's tool as a guideline. I ask, "fairly obvious" to whom?

 

I base this on many newbies' experiences on their first ever lamp post hides, where it takes them time to find, and for some reason, inspire awe (and copycat hides soon after). I haven't taken that for granted. It's still subjective, as rating systems tend to be.

Edited by budd-rdc

Share this post


Link to post
I'm willing to wager that most property owners would not approve geocaches in their parking lots. The cost to insure said property, as well as the shock risk with lamppost caches, would cause most owners to decline approval.
I donj't know that you are correct. Certainly we have seen large companies embrace the idea. Also, I think that you are over-representing the 'shock risk'.
I did make up the statistic, but i'm willing to bet the percentange is close. I think the majority of confrontations between geocachers, and the general public is because of caches being placed in full view of the public, and on private property sans permission.

 

How often does the bomb squad get called on geocaches located on National Forest Land. Most caches that get blown up are in a high visibility, urban setting. On rare occasions, caches with permission get blown up. ...

Ummm, of course more urban caches are going to be reported to the police. Caches that are not seen by the public, don't get any attention from said public. I don't know what this has to do with anything. As you stated, even caches with explicit permission get blown up. Welcome to the 21st century.
I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."
You are going to hate me for stating this but, luckily for you, no one is requiring you to look for urban micros.

Share this post


Link to post
Most of the misconceptions I see with regard to geocaching seem to come from a sense of entitlement from both hider’s and finders and no small amount of unrealistic expectation.

Personally, I find this statement a fine example of the whole post in general--full of bias and sense of, how did wimseyguy put it, "I know what geocaching is supposed to be better than you do." It almost begs to cause angst. Beyond this post I think I'm going to otherwise refrain from responding because the thread is based on misconceptions on the part of the OP himself.

 

I mean, why else would the hobby even exist if it were to not entertain our fellow enthusiasts? Those who fail to even attempt to do so, or do so at the expense of others are, well, the root of such angst.

I would like to ask you for some specific examples of the OP's "misconceptions" to which you refer, as well as specific examples of the fail-to-entertain and entertain-at-the-expense-of-others caches you view as the root of the problem, but I see that you don't plan to post again in this thread, so nevermind.

 

Personally, I thought those Snoogans and wimseyguy comments you quoted were well-worded, wise, insightful and very accurate observations regarding the way certain people perceive the game -- or, more specifically, the way certain people feel that everyone else should perceive the game.

Share this post


Link to post
... And I'll show my angst a little... LAMP POST MICROS ARE NOT 1 STAR DIFFICULTY. They should be at minimum, 1.5 stars, because they are hidden out of sight. People who consider them 1 stars probably don't rely on difficulty/terrain anyway. That goes along with one of the themes in this thread...
Based on Clayjar's tool. lamp post micros should be a difficulty of one, in my opinion. According to the tool, it would be a one if it is 'in plain sight or location is fairly obvious'.
I use Clayjar's tool as a guideline. I ask, "fairly obvious" to whom?

 

I base this on many newbies' experiences on their first ever lamp post hides, where it takes them time to find, and for some reason, inspire awe (and copycat hides soon after). I haven't taken that for granted. It's still subjective, as rating systems tend to be.

Based on that logic, there would be no need for the 'fairly obvious' verbiage, since every new hide type is new for the finder.

Share this post


Link to post
... And I'll show my angst a little... LAMP POST MICROS ARE NOT 1 STAR DIFFICULTY. They should be at minimum, 1.5 stars, because they are hidden out of sight. People who consider them 1 stars probably don't rely on difficulty/terrain anyway. That goes along with one of the themes in this thread...
Based on Clayjar's tool. lamp post micros should be a difficulty of one, in my opinion. According to the tool, it would be a one if it is 'in plain sight or location is fairly obvious'.
I use Clayjar's tool as a guideline. I ask, "fairly obvious" to whom?

 

I base this on many newbies' experiences on their first ever lamp post hides, where it takes them time to find, and for some reason, inspire awe (and copycat hides soon after). I haven't taken that for granted. It's still subjective, as rating systems tend to be.

Based on that logic, there would be no need for the 'fairly obvious' verbiage, since every new hide type is new for the finder.

And I taylor my hides with newbies in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Most of the misconceptions I see with regard to geocaching seem to come from a sense of entitlement from both hider’s and finders and no small amount of unrealistic expectation.

Personally, I find this statement a fine example of the whole post in general--full of bias and sense of, how did wimseyguy put it, "I know what geocaching is supposed to be better than you do." It almost begs to cause angst. Beyond this post I think I'm going to otherwise refrain from responding because the thread is based on misconceptions on the part of the OP himself.

 

I mean, why else would the hobby even exist if it were to not entertain our fellow enthusiasts? Those who fail to even attempt to do so, or do so at the expense of others are, well, the root of such angst.

I would like to ask you for some specific examples of the OP's "misconceptions" to which you refer, as well as specific examples of the fail-to-entertain and entertain-at-the-expense-of-others caches you view as the root of the problem, but I see that you don't plan to post again in this thread, so nevermind.

 

Personally, I thought those Snoogans and wimseyguy comments you quoted were well-worded, wise, insightful and very accurate observations regarding the way certain people perceive the game -- or, more specifically, the way certain people feel that everyone else should perceive the game.

I also thought that Snoogans summed it up perfectly. Edited by sbell111

Share this post


Link to post
... And I'll show my angst a little... LAMP POST MICROS ARE NOT 1 STAR DIFFICULTY. They should be at minimum, 1.5 stars, because they are hidden out of sight. People who consider them 1 stars probably don't rely on difficulty/terrain anyway. That goes along with one of the themes in this thread...
Based on Clayjar's tool. lamp post micros should be a difficulty of one, in my opinion. According to the tool, it would be a one if it is 'in plain sight or location is fairly obvious'.
I use Clayjar's tool as a guideline. I ask, "fairly obvious" to whom?

 

I base this on many newbies' experiences on their first ever lamp post hides, where it takes them time to find, and for some reason, inspire awe (and copycat hides soon after). I haven't taken that for granted. It's still subjective, as rating systems tend to be.

Based on that logic, there would be no need for the 'fairly obvious' verbiage, since every new hide type is new for the finder.

And I taylor my hides with newbies in mind.
I don't see what that has to do with it.

Share this post


Link to post
I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."
You are going to hate me for stating this but, luckily for you, no one is requiring you to look for urban micros.

 

That is exactly why I'm 43 caches shy of 1000 finds, because I purposely skip this type of cache. If I had more free time, I'd be hiking every weekend to earn those smileys, while wearing out boot leather. When there is a shortage of caches, I like to find, in my area, I stop and hide more caches. Of course all of the caches I hide are part of my "Lead by Example series. :tired:

Edited by Kit Fox

Share this post


Link to post
I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."

Not everyone likes parking lot micros, but there is certainly a legitimate 'market' for them.

 

I refer you to this long-winded, yet heartfelt, rebuttal.

 

Geocaching can frequently show you some beautiful and amazing places that you never knew were there, but that's not the ONLY entertainment it provides. And whether or not a cache plays tourguide for you needn't be a standard for quality. The lack of a breathtaking view doesn't automatically imply lameness.

Share this post


Link to post
I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."
You are going to hate me for stating this but, luckily for you, no one is requiring you to look for urban micros.

 

That is exactly why I'm 43 caches shy of 1000 finds, because I purposely skip this type of cache. If I had more free time, I'd be hiking every weekend to earn those smileys, while wearing out boot leather. When there is a shortage of caches, I like to find, in my area, I stop and hide more caches. Of course all of the caches I hide are part of my "Lead by Example series. :tired:

So why the angst?

Share this post


Link to post
I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."

Not everyone likes parking lot micros, but there is certainly a legitimate 'market' for them.

 

I refer you to this long-winded, yet heartfelt, rebuttal.

 

Geocaching can frequently show you some beautiful and amazing places that you never knew were there, but that's not the ONLY entertainment it provides. And whether or not a cache plays tourguide for you needn't be a standard for quality. The lack of a breathtaking view doesn't automatically imply lameness.

By the way, there's another airline pilot/cacher who hides caches in Japan. Don't know if he reads the forums much, but he has posted before. He uses micro containers and uses hiding techniques based on muggle-resistance, but they can't be dismissed for that, because the locations are interesting for people like yourself.

 

I carried an open mind and took a detour to visit them, even if I was yearning for 5 mile hikes to the top of volcanos... and enjoyed them. :tired:

Share this post


Link to post
I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."
You are going to hate me for stating this but, luckily for you, no one is requiring you to look for urban micros.

 

That is exactly why I'm 43 caches shy of 1000 finds, because I purposely skip this type of cache. If I had more free time, I'd be hiking every weekend to earn those smileys, while wearing out boot leather. When there is a shortage of caches, I like to find, in my area, I stop and hide more caches. Of course all of the caches I hide are part of my "Lead by Example series. :tired:

So why the angst?

 

Don't fall for it Kit. Just because you have a different opinion than the OP and SBell111 doesn't make you full of Angst :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."
You are going to hate me for stating this but, luckily for you, no one is requiring you to look for urban micros.

 

That is exactly why I'm 43 caches shy of 1000 finds, because I purposely skip this type of cache. If I had more free time, I'd be hiking every weekend to earn those smileys, while wearing out boot leather. When there is a shortage of caches, I like to find, in my area, I stop and hide more caches. Of course all of the caches I hide are part of my "Lead by Example series. :(

 

It seems you and I BOTH cache to enhance our respective aesthetics and generally avoid caches that could detract from them. :tired:

 

However, you seem to have a "Live & Let DIE" attitude toward caches that you don't like where I have a "Live & Let LIVE" attitude toward them. I'm guessing that attitude comes from your statement that,

Geocaching would be more fun for me, if remote caches, with higher terrain ratings were "worth more."

 

I believe we have identified another branch on the "Tree of Angst." (Say that qoutation in your head in a Superhero voice with just the right amount of echo.) :ph34r::( (TREE OF ANGST, Angst, angst, angst...)

 

I give you the "Geocaching would be more fun for me, if" branch of angst. :(

 

So, of the identified branches we now have:

 

The Theory of Geocaching Evolution

 

Geocaching would be more fun for me, IF

 

Thank you. Please don't take that as a joke at your expense. I really do want to identify all of the branches on this tree. :(

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post
I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."
You are going to hate me for stating this but, luckily for you, no one is requiring you to look for urban micros.

 

That is exactly why I'm 43 caches shy of 1000 finds, because I purposely skip this type of cache. If I had more free time, I'd be hiking every weekend to earn those smileys, while wearing out boot leather. When there is a shortage of caches, I like to find, in my area, I stop and hide more caches. Of course all of the caches I hide are part of my "Lead by Example series. :ph34r:

So why the angst?

 

Don't fall for it Kit. Just because you have a different opinion than the OP and SBell111 doesn't make you full of Angst :tired:

 

He hasn't swallowed the WHOLE tree. He's just chewing on one branch. :(

Share this post


Link to post
I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."
You are going to hate me for stating this but, luckily for you, no one is requiring you to look for urban micros.

 

That is exactly why I'm 43 caches shy of 1000 finds, because I purposely skip this type of cache. If I had more free time, I'd be hiking every weekend to earn those smileys, while wearing out boot leather. When there is a shortage of caches, I like to find, in my area, I stop and hide more caches. Of course all of the caches I hide are part of my "Lead by Example series. :(

 

It seems you and I BOTH cache to enhance our respective aesthetics and generally avoid caches that could detract from them. :(

 

However, you seem to have a "Live & Let DIE" attitude toward caches that you don't like where I have a "Live & Let LIVE" attitude toward them. I'm guessing that attitude comes from your statement that,

Geocaching would be more fun for me, if remote caches, with higher terrain ratings were "worth more."

 

I believe we have identified another branch on the "Tree of Angst." (Say that qoutation in your head in a Superhero voice with just the right amount of echo.) :tired::(

 

I give you the "Geocaching would be more fun for me, if" branch of angst. :(

 

So, of the identified branches we now have:

 

The Theory of Geocaching Evolution

 

Geocaching would be more fun for me, IF

 

Thank you. Please don't take that as a joke at your expense. I really do want to identify all of the branches on this tree. :ph34r:

 

Oh, the tree of angst, of course. Sounds like an ambitious project. I can't wait to see it. :(

Share this post


Link to post

I believe we have identified another branch on the "Tree of Angst."

Oh, the tree of angst, of course. Sounds like an ambitious project. I can't wait to see it. :tired:

I don't like vegetation-based metaphors. They make me all angsty.

 

Couldn't we call it something less controversial? How about the "Wal-mart Parking Lot Light Pole of Angst."

Share this post


Link to post

In the past I used to be very vocal regarding particular types of placements. But in the past months (years?), I've tried very hard to curb my angst regarding this issue. It is indeed true that I am not being forced to search for these caches that don't match the criteria that I like. Consequently, there's a whole subset of caches that don't even get loaded into my GPS on a regular basis. So with letting go of those worries, there are really only two major things in cache hunting that bother me.

 

One angst comes from limitations on the system to provide criteria that will actually allow me to find those types of caches that I enjoy hunting.

 

The pocket queries and GSAK are all great, and they make for fabulous bulk downloads and carve-'em-up data mining to get just the types that I like. But throwing out ALL caches based on a particular characteristic of a cache is a "baby-with-the-bathwater" solution. Let me see if I can come up with a good hypothetical.

 

If there was a data field on the system for caches indicated the color of the container, and I found that in my region, people using purple containers placed caches that I didn't enjoy hunting, I would exclude purple containers from my search, possibly even put them on my ignore list as soon as they pop up. But then along comes a cacher that places caches EXACTLY like I enjoy hunting, but he happens to use purple containers. Because of the limitations of the system, unless I periodically try a purple container cache and realize that this new individual is hiding caches that I would enjoy, I would be missing out on an opportunity to have fun playing this game.

 

However, if there were some OTHER method of showing aggregated information that purple caches were suddenly on the rise in popularity, it would likely be enough to trigger me to look again at purple container caches.

 

There is also the problem of caching out of your area. I have found (as many others have) that caching styles are very regional. There was a time in the Chicago area that many "caches of diminutive size" were hidden with a green wire attached for visibility. I'm reasonably sure this was a local phenomenon. I don't think I have to connect the dots from that statement to this: If I were heading to another area, do I omit searching for purple containers?

============================

 

Another source of angst is in misinformation. There are caches that are clearly mislabeled, either by mistake or intentionally. I ran across an intentionally mislabeled cache a while ago, and it took me specifically to a cache hide that I had tried to exclude. The owner was trying to make some kind of "point" but it was lost on me. I have precious little caching time. I have very little patience for someone to purposefully fool me into hunting something that I didn't want to hunt.

 

If something is mislabeled accidentally, I have some patience, but I will be the first in line to e-mail the hider asking him/her to correct the listing so that others don't make the same mistake.

============================

So to boil down the branches of my Tree of Angst:

*Angst over the possibility of missed opportunities for increased enjoyment

*Angst over intentionally being misled

Share this post


Link to post

Excellent post Markwell. That is exactly what I was looking for. :tired:

 

*Angst over the possibility of missed opportunities for increased enjoyment

 

I believe that might actually be the first leaf on the "Geocaching would be more fun for me, IF," branch of the tree.

 

*Angst over intentionally being misled

 

This one seems interchangeable with the "root" causes (participation) or possibly the "water." (negative or perceived negative interaction)

Share this post


Link to post
I look at urban micros this way, "wow, if it wasn't for geocaching, i'd never know this parking lot even existed."
You are going to hate me for stating this but, luckily for you, no one is requiring you to look for urban micros.

 

That is exactly why I'm 43 caches shy of 1000 finds, because I purposely skip this type of cache. If I had more free time, I'd be hiking every weekend to earn those smileys, while wearing out boot leather. When there is a shortage of caches, I like to find, in my area, I stop and hide more caches. Of course all of the caches I hide are part of my "Lead by Example series. :ph34r:

So why the angst?

 

Don't fall for it Kit. Just because you have a different opinion than the OP and SBell111 doesn't make you full of Angst :tired:

 

Actually, I feel no angst about the topic, I just enjoy a good old fashioned debate.

 

Snoogans, you routinely post "angst free" threads about the scenic views coming from caches, especially your Sierra Nevada caches. Ever noticed, that the majority of parking lot caches have no photo galleries?

 

I'm not against micros placed in historical spots, unique works of art, or some hidden gem type location. What I do have distaste for is uninspired hides in locations not needing caches, like Walmart Parking Lots.

Share this post


Link to post
So to boil down the branches of my Tree of Angst:

*Angst over the possibility of missed opportunities for increased enjoyment

*Angst over intentionally being misled

Couldn't the same be said of life in general?

 

*Angst over the possibility of missed opportunities for increased enjoyment

-- The great movie you skipped because the critics hated it

-- The great restaurant you didn't know was there because it was too new for the listing to show up in your phone book

-- the cool party you missed because your answering machine/voice mail seized up

 

*Angst over intentionally being misled

-- The wonderful weekend travel deal that turned out to be nothing more than a day long timeshare sales pitch

-- The 'Family Size' container of food that turned out to be only 1/3 full (even though the net weight on the label was accurate)

-- [insert pretty much any failed romantic relationship here]

 

Those things don't bother me any more or less when they happen in Geocaching than they do when they happen to me in everyday life, which is only as much as I let them.

 

The original post was more specific: "Let’s discuss the common themes that lead to angst here in the forums, at events, and between hiders and finders." I just don’t see those two quoted issues as being specific to Geocaching – they’re more a general part of Life and Dealing with Disappointment, and there’s really no way to completely avoid them.

 

Although ... come to think of it, I guess the same could be said of some of the other previously mentioned elements such as "Entitlement," "Expectation" and "I know better than YOU what geocaching is supposed/intended to be all about."

 

So – is it possible the Tree of Angst is merely yet another tiny inhabitant in the infinitely large Forest of Human Disgruntlement? :tired:

Share this post


Link to post
Because geocaching has involved into two groups, the "in it for the numbers" crowd, and the more traditional, "in it for the adventure" group. Geocaching would be more fun for me, if remote caches, with higher terrain ratings were "worth more." ...
I disagree with your premise that geocachers fit into your two groups.

 

 

YEAH! Me too! I highly RESEMBLE that remark!! :tired:

 

How about those of us that are in it for the SWAG! The "booty"! The "treasure delectus"!!

 

Rave on! :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

So – is it possible the Tree of Angst is merely yet another tiny inhabitant in the infinitely large Forest of Human Disgruntlement? :(

 

:(:(:(:(

 

 

:tired::(

 

Yes, but one would hope that there would be a nice view just a short hike up the hill from "OUR" tree as it would have to be near the edge of the "forest." :(

 

 

I have already conceded that even I inhabit an as yet untitled branch of the geocaching "Tree of Angst"(did anyone catch that earlier? :ph34r: )

 

I visualize it as a lower branch that is holding an ax and is chopping away at the trunk. :(:)

Share this post


Link to post
Because geocaching has involved into two groups, the "in it for the numbers" crowd, and the more traditional, "in it for the adventure" group. Geocaching would be more fun for me, if remote caches, with higher terrain ratings were "worth more." ...
I disagree with your premise that geocachers fit into your two groups.

 

 

YEAH! Me too! I highly RESEMBLE that remark!! :tired:

 

How about those of us that are in it for the SWAG! The "booty"! The "treasure delectus"!!

 

Rave on! :ph34r:

 

What are the rules in Geocaching?

 

Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple:

 

1. Take something from the cache

 

2. Leave something in the cache

 

3. Write about it in the logbook

 

Where you place a cache is up to you

 

Considering that most micros don't contain any swag, how do you feel about them now.

Share this post


Link to post
Because geocaching has involved into two groups, the "in it for the numbers" crowd, and the more traditional, "in it for the adventure" group. Geocaching would be more fun for me, if remote caches, with higher terrain ratings were "worth more." ...
I disagree with your premise that geocachers fit into your two groups.

 

 

YEAH! Me too! I highly RESEMBLE that remark!! :tired:

 

How about those of us that are in it for the SWAG! The "booty"! The "treasure delectus"!!

 

Rave on! :ph34r:

 

What are the rules in Geocaching?

 

Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple:

 

1. Take something from the cache

 

2. Leave something in the cache

 

3. Write about it in the logbook

 

Where you place a cache is up to you

 

Considering that most micros don't contain any swag, how do you feel about them now.

 

I believe that this quote frome the guidelines supports the valitity of all micros:

 

Will it be easy to find? - If it is too visible, or too close to busy roads, trails, etc. there's a good chance someone may stumble upon it.

 

Micros are generally harder to stumble upon which makes them ideal for busy roads, trails, parking lots, high traffic areas, etc. where a regular or larger cache couldn't survive.

 

Frankly, I think that's where the angst is rooted. A micro can take a much larger time investment for a lesser perceived reward. Still, you CHOSE to hunt it. You have no one to blame but yourself for NOT enjoying how you chose to spend your free time to geocache. (By YOU I of course mean everyone that harbors this angst toward micros.)

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

×
×
  • Create New...