Urban Caching

[+drat19]

Jane, you ignorant, micro spewing, butt.

 

Enough said.

I actually heard Dan Akroyd's voice when I read that....

 

Just 10 minutes ago I was explaining to my daughter how The Coneheads (a movie) actually started as an SNL skit.

 

I might be mistaken, but hasn't Jane left us?

Nope: http://www.deadoraliveinfo.com/dead.nsf/cn...-nf/Curtin+Jane

[+Blue Power Ranger]

[+drat19]

I agree...I've already sent MM a request to finally shut this thread down...

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Well, before this thread gets closed, let me say this:

 

I have, from reading this thread in the past few days, learned a wonderful and fun new insult to throw at people:

"You are a micro-spewing profile-stalking sock puppet troll!"

 

[Mr.Yuck]

Well, before this thread gets closed, let me say this:

 

I have, from reading this thread in the past few days, learned a wonderful and fun new insult to throw at people:

"You are a micro-spewing profile-stalking sock puppet troll!"

 

 

That is accurate, except for the micro-spewing part. Oh, and IBTL.

Edited February 3, 2007 by TheWhiteUrkel

[Cytron]

I find it silly to attack the people who complain about MicroSpew for having found some urban micros or even for logging thank you. These people are complaining about MicroSpew because the have yet to find away to skip all MicroSpew without skipping some urban micros they might like. There are many reason why an urban micro hater may look for an urban micro. Kit Fox appparently is willing to hold his nose and look in a parking lot if there is a geocoin he wants to log there. I'll wager that most of these cachers will hunt these when they go caching with friends who do like to do these caches. And if the logs say thanks for the cache, it just shows that they are polite. My impression is that the anti-urban cachers don't really feel all urban micros are lame. They either found one in some really disgusting place or just got tired of too many lightpost in one day and want to vent their frustration in the forums. Even people who enjoy urban caching have days when they complain about a poorly placed cache or about lack of creativity.

 

This cache ruined it for me. I still not sure why I actually found it. I think I found it, because I was going to find #800 the next day, and I was running short of time to get close to the milestone. Now I'm in no rush for milestones, I only find the caches that I want to find, and only blame myself, if I don't have fun.

 

So Caches you think are Crappy are good enough if they help you reach a milestone?

[Cytron]

Del Taco Van Nuys #3 you said "My first Del Taco cache, thanks."

I had some time to blow, and this was almost a year, and 206 find ago. My preference changed.

 

Maybe Kit Fox was a "stoned cacher" at that particuliar time, and he needed to stop at the Taco stand for some munchies?

 

Wow thats funny..does it make you feel better when you put down the new guy on the forums?

wait a minute im new too...i guess thats what makes me a sockpuppet something or other...

[+Kit Fox]

I find it silly to attack the people who complain about MicroSpew for having found some urban micros or even for logging thank you. These people are complaining about MicroSpew because the have yet to find away to skip all MicroSpew without skipping some urban micros they might like. There are many reason why an urban micro hater may look for an urban micro. Kit Fox appparently is willing to hold his nose and look in a parking lot if there is a geocoin he wants to log there. I'll wager that most of these cachers will hunt these when they go caching with friends who do like to do these caches. And if the logs say thanks for the cache, it just shows that they are polite. My impression is that the anti-urban cachers don't really feel all urban micros are lame. They either found one in some really disgusting place or just got tired of too many lightpost in one day and want to vent their frustration in the forums. Even people who enjoy urban caching have days when they complain about a poorly placed cache or about lack of creativity.

 

This cache ruined it for me. I still not sure why I actually found it. I think I found it, because I was going to find #800 the next day, and I was running short of time to get close to the milestone. Now I'm in no rush for milestones, I only find the caches that I want to find, and only blame myself, if I don't have fun.

 

So Caches you think are Crappy are good enough if they help you reach a milestone?

 

Perhaps you should re-read my last sentence, you'll learn plenty.

 

Now I'm in no rush for milestones, I only find the caches that I want to find, and only blame myself, if I don't have fun.

 

Maybe Kit Fox was a "stoned cacher" at that particuliar time, and he needed to stop at the Taco stand for some munchies?

 

Funny, except for the fact that i've never been "stoned" in my life. I guess growing up a "Cop's kid," and wanting to be in Law Enforcement when I grew up, kept me away from illicit drugs.

[Cytron]

Welcome to the land of peace and logic, cytron. You will quickly find that Drat's not being able to read your post does not really affect you, at all.

 

Thanks sbell111,

 

He seems a bit hostile,All i was trying to say is if someone hates "MicroSpew" so much then dont do them.

He didnt mind any micro he could find when he was starting out,Because when your new (like me) your excited to cache,if it takes me to Tim Hortons Parking lot or to the Edge of the earth its still a cache.People Might say that in 6-7 years i will hate micro spew aswell, if so, i wont cache them and i wont "publish" a letter urging people to follow my Opinion.

 

i like tea,who likes coffee?

[Cytron]

Dern! Now I feel left out. Obviously I'm not posting enough anti-micro comments if I can't even get a sock-puppet troll to review my profile.

 

OK, back on topic:

Varg, I don't think Groundspeak will take any action regarding quality control. Their role is strictly that of a listing service, and if a soggy log film canister hidden by a stinky dumpster meets the guidelines, it will get published. I don't think there is any way to stop micro-spew, as there are far too many uninspired players in this game now. I believe we can attempt to limit micro-spew through leading by example, posting honest logs and avoiding carpy caches.

 

Again mature Comments from a "Vetern" cacher.I havent called any names..just telling you what i think.

Maybe it isnt Peer Presure we need but Vetern Leadership,Lead by example Riffster, Dont resort to name calling.Maybe this is the First time you have Been a "leader" or a "winner" in your life..but remember..With great power comes Great responsibilty

[Cytron]

There are many people that feel this way or will eventually feel this way once they cross the line like we have.

I find this statement to be quite rude. It assumes that everyone that doesn't agree with you is somehow 'less evolved'. I'm kind of surprised that you would stoop to such a statement.

I'm not sure why you took it that way. I think most of the people that complain about microspew have crossed an imaginary line where they had enough of it. I've said before in prior logs that if most people do a repetitive activity, they will eventually become bored with it. I think almost everyone will agree that they enjoyed the first lamp post cache that they found. The second one wasn't quite the same since they had seen it before. The 3rd, 4th...10th......50th.........100th........I think you get the point. Somewhere between the 2nd one and the 100th one most people cross a line and get completely bored with it. So my point is that it's the variety of caches that makes caching more fun.

 

in your opinion?

[Cytron]

I've said before in prior logs that if most people do a repetitive activity, they will eventually become bored with it.

You'll pardon my sense of irony TG, since you know we're totally on the same side of this debate:

 

My head is starting to hurt from banging it against the wall making this same argument around here over and over and over again. Also ironically, it hurts EVEN THOUGH I'm not reading posts from the 2 users I've plonked. That's why I've indicated that I think it's time to close this thread...it's a lost cause.

 

If your so bored of Geocaching then dont do it. Are you going to Re-invent the wheel because some guys that have been doing it for a long time got bored?

 

Doesnt make sense to me.

[Cytron]

 

Thanks for the analysis of my logs...glad you had some time on your hands for that.

 

I had a much longer response written debunking most of your points, but I've elected not to bother. You just continue to have fun researching my logs and chasing Spew.

 

Resorting to name calling huh?? thats mature...again...if you hate Micros so much,,,why do you do them? and why do you place micro caches?

 

<edited out upon request>

Once again, TWU, you da man...thanks for the backup.

 

Having said that: For one thing, I don't think he's a sock puppet based on HIS logs...he just looks like a newcomer based there in BC, who discovered these discussions and has jumped in a little too aggressively without being prepared for the repercussions of HIS words by other readers. That's why he only elicited, basically, a "whatever" response from me (along with the plonkage, of course ).

 

As for the e-stalking of my logs, well, I suppose we're all susceptible to that by posting our experiences and travels in this game publicly like this. Folks are free to intepret them however they want, if they feel the need to spend that much time examining them.

 

 

"Jumped in a little to agressively without being prepared for the repercussions of HIS words by other readers.That's why he only elicited, basically, a "whatever" response from me (along with the plonkage, of course."

 

That statement makes no sense.first off, i wasnt aggressive,and the only repercussions ive faced are name callings, and your "whatever" response just proves my point and your back tracking.

 

He Cached OVER 5 DOZEN MICROS the year his "Anti-Micro" letter came out.

 

thats all i have i to say

Edited February 3, 2007 by Cytron

[Cytron]

I find it silly to attack the people who complain about MicroSpew for having found some urban micros or even for logging thank you. These people are complaining about MicroSpew because the have yet to find away to skip all MicroSpew without skipping some urban micros they might like. There are many reason why an urban micro hater may look for an urban micro. Kit Fox appparently is willing to hold his nose and look in a parking lot if there is a geocoin he wants to log there. I'll wager that most of these cachers will hunt these when they go caching with friends who do like to do these caches. And if the logs say thanks for the cache, it just shows that they are polite. My impression is that the anti-urban cachers don't really feel all urban micros are lame. They either found one in some really disgusting place or just got tired of too many lightpost in one day and want to vent their frustration in the forums. Even people who enjoy urban caching have days when they complain about a poorly placed cache or about lack of creativity.

 

This cache ruined it for me. I still not sure why I actually found it. I think I found it, because I was going to find #800 the next day, and I was running short of time to get close to the milestone. Now I'm in no rush for milestones, I only find the caches that I want to find, and only blame myself, if I don't have fun.

 

So Caches you think are Crappy are good enough if they help you reach a milestone?

 

Perhaps you should re-read my last sentence, you'll learn plenty.

 

Now I'm in no rush for milestones, I only find the caches that I want to find, and only blame myself, if I don't have fun.

 

Maybe Kit Fox was a "stoned cacher" at that particuliar time, and he needed to stop at the Taco stand for some munchies?

 

Funny, except for the fact that i've never been "stoned" in my life. I guess growing up a "Cop's kid," and wanting to be in Law Enforcement when I grew up, kept me away from illicit drugs.

 

was that before or after cache #500?

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Hoot! IBTL!!!

 

[Mr.Yuck]

 

Thanks for the analysis of my logs...glad you had some time on your hands for that.

 

I had a much longer response written debunking most of your points, but I've elected not to bother. You just continue to have fun researching my logs and chasing Spew.

 

Resorting to name calling huh?? thats mature...again...if you hate Micros so much,,,why do you do them? and why do you place micro caches?

 

<edited out upon request>

Once again, TWU, you da man...thanks for the backup.

 

Having said that: For one thing, I don't think he's a sock puppet based on HIS logs...he just looks like a newcomer based there in BC, who discovered these discussions and has jumped in a little too aggressively without being prepared for the repercussions of HIS words by other readers. That's why he only elicited, basically, a "whatever" response from me (along with the plonkage, of course ).

 

As for the e-stalking of my logs, well, I suppose we're all susceptible to that by posting our experiences and travels in this game publicly like this. Folks are free to intepret them however they want, if they feel the need to spend that much time examining them.

 

 

"Jumped in a little to agressively without being prepared for the repercussions of HIS words by other readers.That's why he only elicited, basically, a "whatever" response from me (along with the plonkage, of course."

 

That statement makes no sense.first off, i wasnt aggressive,and the only repercussions ive faced are name callings, and your "whatever" response just proves my point and your back tracking.

 

He placed OVER 5 DOZEN MICROS the year his "Anti-Micro" letter came out.

 

thats all i have i to say

 

That would be over 60? That would be incorrect. *PLONK*

[Neos2]

There are many people that feel this way or will eventually feel this way once they cross the line like we have.

I find this statement to be quite rude. It assumes that everyone that doesn't agree with you is somehow 'less evolved'. I'm kind of surprised that you would stoop to such a statement.

I'm not sure why you took it that way. I think most of the people that complain about microspew have crossed an imaginary line where they had enough of it. I've said before in prior logs that if most people do a repetitive activity, they will eventually become bored with it. I think almost everyone will agree that they enjoyed the first lamp post cache that they found. The second one wasn't quite the same since they had seen it before. The 3rd, 4th...10th......50th.........100th........I think you get the point. Somewhere between the 2nd one and the 100th one most people cross a line and get completely bored with it. So my point is that it's the variety of caches that makes caching more fun.

I know what you mean. At some point, I got totally bored with plodding along trails looking for an unnatural pile of sticks or a hollow log with an ammo can in it --that I would rip my fingernail trying to open anyway-- and so I hardly ever go out looking for those mundane and unimaginative kinds of hides anymore. I save my quality caching time for ingenious, imaginative micros in urban areas.

Seriously, too many repetitions of anything can be boring. I think we all need all the variety that geocaching has to offer for those times when we burn out or feel like we are in a rut.

Edited February 3, 2007 by Neos2

[Neos2]

Even people who enjoy urban caching have days when they complain about a poorly placed cache or about lack of creativity.

Not all people.

 

Your sig line says "If you're not having fun, you don't have anyone to blame but yourself." I happen to agree with that when it comes to this issue.

 

We all deal with things every day in life that aren't as perfect as we'd have liked. Some of us, however, choose not to whine about our fellow cachers' occasional failure to adequately entertain us to our satisfaction.

It's amazing how often I agree with KBI. I haven't found many caches --period--that weren't just about what I expected them to be because I read the cache pages before I go hunt them. Oh, there have been a couple that made me laugh out loud when I realized how truely ironic they were, and one or two that were ingenious beyond anything the understated cache page led me to expect. But for the most part, when I read the cache page and glance at the map, I know if I am heading out to find a micro in a historic spot, a scenic spot, or behind the nearest big box retailer or if I can expect an ammo can in a hole in a tree or a decon container in a spot looking over a two-mile stretch of winding river.

 

I usually skip the big box ones, unless the logs make them sound like something special--but if I do go there, and it's just an ordinary hide behind the big box, I just post my find (or not) and start looking for my next adventure. Of course, I've been known to pass on the ammo can, too. (Rarely on the river though!)

Edited February 3, 2007 by Neos2

[+KBI]

I save my quality caching time for ingenious, imaginative micros in urban areas.

Like this one?

[+supertbone]

I find it silly to attack the people who complain about MicroSpew for having found some urban micros or even for logging thank you. These people are complaining about MicroSpew because the have yet to find away to skip all MicroSpew without skipping some urban micros they might like. There are many reason why an urban micro hater may look for an urban micro. Kit Fox appparently is willing to hold his nose and look in a parking lot if there is a geocoin he wants to log there. I'll wager that most of these cachers will hunt these when they go caching with friends who do like to do these caches. And if the logs say thanks for the cache, it just shows that they are polite. My impression is that the anti-urban cachers don't really feel all urban micros are lame. They either found one in some really disgusting place or just got tired of too many lightpost in one day and want to vent their frustration in the forums. Even people who enjoy urban caching have days when they complain about a poorly placed cache or about lack of creativity.

 

This cache ruined it for me. I still not sure why I actually found it. I think I found it, because I was going to find #800 the next day, and I was running short of time to get close to the milestone. Now I'm in no rush for milestones, I only find the caches that I want to find, and only blame myself, if I don't have fun.

 

So Caches you think are Crappy are good enough if they help you reach a milestone?

 

Perhaps you should re-read my last sentence, you'll learn plenty.

 

Now I'm in no rush for milestones, I only find the caches that I want to find, and only blame myself, if I don't have fun.

 

Maybe Kit Fox was a "stoned cacher" at that particuliar time, and he needed to stop at the Taco stand for some munchies?

 

Funny, except for the fact that i've never been "stoned" in my life. I guess growing up a "Cop's kid," and wanting to be in Law Enforcement when I grew up, kept me away from illicit drugs.

 

was that before or after cache #500?

 

Calm down man. I think you would do a better justice to your point if you were a little less rude.

[Cytron]

Well, before this thread gets closed, let me say this:

 

I have, from reading this thread in the past few days, learned a wonderful and fun new insult to throw at people:

"You are a micro-spewing profile-stalking sock puppet troll!"

 

 

That is accurate, except for the micro-spewing part. Oh, and IBTL.

 

What do you know about me? you have tried to insult me with your name calling..Grow up and stop acting like a teenager.If insulting people makes you feel better about yourself then go ahead, if not start acting like an adult.your supposed to be a vetern cacher...how many forums posts do you have??im a newb and im showing more class than you.

 

As for profile stalking? you profile is availible to all, so its not really stalking, but again if trying to make fun of someone else makes you feel good,go ahead.

 

as for the troll part, well i dont really get that, maybe it has a secret meaning..or maybe it means im as ugly as a troll??..like i said im new to caching

[Cytron]

I find it silly to attack the people who complain about MicroSpew for having found some urban micros or even for logging thank you. These people are complaining about MicroSpew because the have yet to find away to skip all MicroSpew without skipping some urban micros they might like. There are many reason why an urban micro hater may look for an urban micro. Kit Fox appparently is willing to hold his nose and look in a parking lot if there is a geocoin he wants to log there. I'll wager that most of these cachers will hunt these when they go caching with friends who do like to do these caches. And if the logs say thanks for the cache, it just shows that they are polite. My impression is that the anti-urban cachers don't really feel all urban micros are lame. They either found one in some really disgusting place or just got tired of too many lightpost in one day and want to vent their frustration in the forums. Even people who enjoy urban caching have days when they complain about a poorly placed cache or about lack of creativity.

 

This cache ruined it for me. I still not sure why I actually found it. I think I found it, because I was going to find #800 the next day, and I was running short of time to get close to the milestone. Now I'm in no rush for milestones, I only find the caches that I want to find, and only blame myself, if I don't have fun.

 

So Caches you think are Crappy are good enough if they help you reach a milestone?

 

Perhaps you should re-read my last sentence, you'll learn plenty.

 

Now I'm in no rush for milestones, I only find the caches that I want to find, and only blame myself, if I don't have fun.

 

Maybe Kit Fox was a "stoned cacher" at that particuliar time, and he needed to stop at the Taco stand for some munchies?

 

Funny, except for the fact that i've never been "stoned" in my life. I guess growing up a "Cop's kid," and wanting to be in Law Enforcement when I grew up, kept me away from illicit drugs.

 

was that before or after cache #500?

 

Calm down man. I think you would do a better justice to your point if you were a little less rude.

 

now thats funny..

 

how am i being rude?? maybe if i resorted to name calling id be less rude?

[Clan Riffster]

I think almost everyone will agree that they enjoyed the first lamp post cache that they found.

Sorry TG, gotta call you on that one!

My first lamp post micro was fairly early in my history. My GPSr wanted me to go into a parking lot. It kinda piqued my interest, and had me wondering how someone could hide a cache in 100 acres of blacktop. My anticipation rose as I got further into the parking lot, thinking somebody must be really clever to come up with a hide that works here. As I drove closer, I saw the arrow pointing at a lamp post.

Hmmm?

What the....

Naw....can't be. Surely nobody would put something in that.....

Sigh...... Yep, they did....

"Groundspeak, The Language of Location"

In defense of this hide, it was a very nice parking lot. The pot holes were mostly repaired. The lines were straight and brightly painted. Very little trash blowing around. The lamp posts themselves were well maintained. There was even a spot of flora nearby....about 1500' away was a sad looking scrub oak. On a parking lot scale of 1 to 10, I'd give it a 7.

[Mushtang]

I agree...I've already sent MM a request to finally shut this thread down...

I've never understood this. If the thread bothers you so much why do you still read it and reply to it?

 

Instead of begging MM to lock it, why not just NOT click on the link? A lot of other people seem to be having fun with it.

 

This seems to also be the mentality of a lot of cachers in this thread. You've posted 25 times to this thread, but for some reason now that you're tired of it you want it to stop - regardless of the fact that others enjoy posting to it. Cachers in this thread have admitted that they used to enjoy micros that they now consider "lame", but now that they no longer like them they're calling for people to stop hiding them.

 

"Newbies shouldn't hide micros in parking lots"

"Your first hide was a parking lot micro"

"Yeah well, that was 4 years ago and I was new"

[+KBI]

im a newb and im showing more class than you.

That's debatable.

 

I happen to agree with your position on the so-called "lame" micro hides, Cytron. I agree with it 100%. You made your point very effectively, and I'm on your side.

 

I also agree, however, with the folks here who have suggested that you should calm down and try to participate in this debate without getting so wrapped around the axle. From your first post you fired with both barrels in a way that was combative to say the least ... and a little creepy to say a bit more.

 

What do you know about me?

These discussions are a lot of fun, but you can't let any of it bother you emotionally. You're right: We DON'T know you, so how can you take any of this personally?

 

I recommend breathing into a paper bag for a few minutes before your next post.

 

Welcome to the Groundspeak Forums.

[+drat19]

I agree...I've already sent MM a request to finally shut this thread down...

I've never understood this. If the thread bothers you so much why do you still read it and reply to it?

 

Instead of begging MM to lock it, why not just NOT click on the link? A lot of other people seem to be having fun with it.

 

This seems to also be the mentality of a lot of cachers in this thread. You've posted 25 times to this thread, but for some reason now that you're tired of it you want it to stop - regardless of the fact that others enjoy posting to it. Cachers in this thread have admitted that they used to enjoy micros that they now consider "lame", but now that they no longer like them they're calling for people to stop hiding them.

 

"Newbies shouldn't hide micros in parking lots"

"Your first hide was a parking lot micro"

"Yeah well, that was 4 years ago and I was new"

I've gotta give you props for that post. Seriously, no sarcasm. This thread is a lot like how I used to cache...I used to chase after everything, and then I got bored when it became clear it would have to be on Micro Spew if I wanted to continue to crank stats. I'm similarly tired of this thread...and yet I still check in on it. (Happily, all I hear is a faint buzzing sound when it comes to the 2 posters I've plonked.)

 

I will say one thing, though: I was THRILLED when this page finally dropped to page 2 a few days ago, before the horse was brought back to life for further beatings. When it was revived and I saw that I was the target, I guess I felt no choice but to respond.

Edited February 3, 2007 by drat19

[+KBI]

I agree...I've already sent MM a request to finally shut this thread down...

I've never understood this. If the thread bothers you so much why do you still read it and reply to it?

I've never understood it either.

 

The folks who always post the beating-a-dead-horse image or call for a lock as a thread begins to run long are pretty much the same folks who jump right back in to the very same debate as soon as it appears in the next thread.

 

The discussion bothers you. Fine. You have a right to your opinion, but let's look at this logically:

 

Either you're still reading the thread, or you're not.

 

If you don't like seeing the issue discussed anymore, then why continue to read the thread?

 

If you're NOT reading the thread, does it bother you that others are continuing to discuss the issue in a thread you're NOT reading? If so, does that give you any legitimate say as to whether the thread you're NOT reading should be shut down?

[+drat19]

I agree...I've already sent MM a request to finally shut this thread down...

I've never understood this. If the thread bothers you so much why do you still read it and reply to it?

I've never understood it either.

 

The folks who always post the beating-a-dead-horse image or call for a lock as a thread begins to run long are pretty much the same folks who jump right back in to the very same debate as soon as it appears in the next thread.

 

The discussion bothers you. Fine. You have a right to your opinion, but let's look at this logically:

 

Either you're still reading the thread, or you're not.

 

If you don't like seeing the issue discussed anymore, then why continue to read the thread?

 

If you're NOT reading the thread, does it bother you that others are continuing to discuss the issue in a thread you're NOT reading? If so, does that give you any legitimate say as to whether the thread you're NOT reading should be shut down?

Read my post directly above yours. Unlike most people around here, I'm not sitting here behind my keyboard puffing more righteous indignation anonymously than I would if the discussion were in person. I gave that post its proper due and respect.

Edited February 3, 2007 by drat19

[The Vargman]

Well, to bring this thread a back into the topic a bit more and perhaps save, what I find (perhaps because I'm a noob) to be an interesting topic thread...

 

Is there anyone else that doesn't exactly see "the numbers" as part of the issue? Mind you I do note the point that it could have been the reason for the spread of the urban micro.

[+drat19]

Well, to bring this thread a back into the topic a bit more and perhaps save, what I find (perhaps because I'm a noob) to be an interesting topic thread...

 

Is there anyone else that doesn't exactly see "the numbers" as part of the issue? Mind you I do note the point that it could have been the reason for the spread of the urban micro.

OK, while I still believe "the numbers" is the primary reason for Micro Spew, here's another possible reason: As the game has become more mainstream, there's the convenience factor.

 

We were having a discussion about the urban micro explosion a while back at a Twin Cities caching get-together I attended. Someone said, "Well, I don't want to have to drive more than 5 miles for a cache when there are still places where they could be hidden closer by." I nearly fainted. Before the urban micro explosion, it was not uncommon for cachers to clear out their own radius and then have to drive 10, 20, 50, or more miles to find their next nearest caches. And we did it WILLINGLY...it was an opportunity to explore "uncharted territory" that was still within a relatively close distance.

 

Times have changed...cachers want their caches and they want them as convenient as possible. Some folks have cited the rising cost of gasoline in the past few years, but I say that's bunk...cachers are generally an upper-middle-class or higher lot, and don't tell me that driving from cache to cache to cache (to cache to cache to cache....) around town doesn't use up as much gas as driving out into the country.

[The Vargman]

OK, while I still believe "the numbers" is the primary reason for Micro Spew, here's another possible reason: As the game has become more mainstream, there's the convenience factor.

 

We were having a discussion about the urban micro explosion a while back at a Twin Cities caching get-together I attended. Someone said, "Well, I don't want to have to drive more than 5 miles for a cache when there are still places where they could be hidden closer by." I nearly fainted. Before the urban micro explosion, it was not uncommon for cachers to clear out their own radius and then have to drive 10, 20, 50, or more miles to find their next nearest caches. And we did it WILLINGLY...it was an opportunity to explore "uncharted territory" that was still within a relatively close distance.

 

Times have changed...cachers want their caches and they want them as convenient as possible. Some folks have cited the rising cost of gasoline in the past few years, but I say that's bunk...cachers are generally an upper-middle-class or higher lot, and don't tell me that driving from cache to cache to cache (to cache to cache to cache....) around town doesn't use up as much gas as driving out into the country.

 

Interesting. I obviously don't have any data, and certainly minimal experience, but I don't know that the convenience of a cache is in the mindset of most new cachers. "This is cool" comes more to mind. Being one myself, I'm actually looking forward to getting more outside my city and seeing new areas. I was also really glad that some cachers took me to local areas I would either drive by and say "We need to stop there someday" or "Hmm. Never knew this existed." So at the moment, my wife and I are trying to "clear out" our area (occasionally along with some good friends) to get to the point where we have to go outside the area we know to cache. It's just a goal we kinda set.

[+drat19]

I was also really glad that some cachers took me to local areas I would either drive by and say "We need to stop there someday" or "Hmm. Never knew this existed."

I agree with that...if/when the locations are indeed worthwhile.

 

Case in point: Back when virts were still able to be placed, local cachers in Fort Worth placed scads of them at any/all of the local historical locations (of which there are many in that town!). During a business gig there, I spent many evenings after work driving around town logging those virts, and I developed a real sense of the history of the town that way. It was GREAT.

 

I'm not sure I would feel the same way if I had been going from shopping center parking lot to shopping center parking lot to highway guardrail to...you get the idea. That's the situation in an increasing number of metro areas. What other reason could there be for those caches but stats and convenience?

 

When I was actively placing caches around Biloxi pre-Katrina, I tried to place my own hides (virtual or physical...and yes, physical micros!) with an eye towards the town's history, attractions, and "hidden gem" locations. The typical logs I received from searchers were a whole lot more "Thanks for bringing me to this location I never would have discovered otherwise" than "TFTC". Oh, and I also placed my caches with the intent that they actually would be FOUND. Sometimes my hides were tricky, but I never meant to impose on any cacher an extended search or high muggle discovery probability. That's another thing that seems to have changed recently.

Edited February 3, 2007 by drat19

[The Vargman]

What other reason could there be for those caches but stats and convenience?

 

Well, my thought is that (while you may be correct for some of them) it might be because THEY thought it was neat (or creative er something). Maybe comparing it to art might help. Me? I love Monet. You may think "What's the point? Why doesn't he just paint it how it really looks?". But his work is still generally considered "art" by the whole community.

 

Mind you, I do see how you can come to your conclusion as well.

[+drat19]

What other reason could there be for those caches but stats and convenience?

 

Well, my thought is that (while you may be correct for some of them) it might be because THEY thought it was neat (or creative er something). Maybe comparing it to art might help. Me? I love Monet. You may think "What's the point? Why doesn't he just paint it how it really looks?". But his work is still generally considered "art" by the whole community.

 

Mind you, I do see how you can come to your conclusion as well.

Fair counterpoint. I would offer this counter to your counter: ONE or TWO lamppost or guardrail hides are probably neat or creative to the new cacher. 50, 100 or more? Not so sure about that. THAT's the issue.

[+KBI]

Read my post directly above yours. Unlike most people around here, I'm not sitting here behind my keyboard puffing more righteous indignation anonymously than I would if the discussion were in person. I gave that post its proper due and respect.

Then why did you issue a formal request for the thread to be shut down? You never really answered Mushtang's question:

• Instead of begging MM to lock it, why not just NOT click on the link?
  

 

... or mine. I posted what I thought were some clear and reasonable questions as well:

• If you don't like seeing the issue discussed anymore, then why continue to read the thread?
  
• If you're NOT reading the thread, does it bother you that others are continuing to discuss the issue in a thread you're NOT reading?
  
• If so, does that give you any legitimate say as to whether the thread you're NOT reading should be shut down?
  

 

You danced around the answer a bit:

 

I'm similarly tired of this thread...and yet I still check in on it.

Why? That's what I'm asking. If you're tired of it, why torture yourself?

 

I will say one thing, though: I was THRILLED when this page finally dropped to page 2 a few days ago, before the horse was brought back to life for further beatings.

If you were THRILLED that the thread dropped off the first page, then shouldn't you be THRILLED to know that you possess the power NOT to click on the thread at all?

 

When it was revived and I saw that I was the target, I guess I felt no choice but to respond.

"Felt no choice?" Please explain. Is there a gun to your head?

 

I don’t mean to sound snarky (I apologize if I do), and I’m not picking on you personally. You’re just one of the many, many people who consistently react to long-running debates by complaining that they’re unpleasant to read – or worse, by asking for them to be shut down even while others are obviously enjoying the discussion.

 

My questions are right on topic: Such a reaction to threads like this one serves as a perfect analogy. The response we keep hearing from the folks who express strong dislike for a certain flavor of geocache is reasonable in itself, yet many of these people either continue to hunt them – or worse, they call for them to be controlled somehow even while others are obviously enjoying them.

 

Why? I’ve yet to be convinced that “lame” caches are difficult to detect (I’m not that smart and I have never had trouble detecting them – I don’t even use PQs) , and neither have I been convinced that the game suffers due to their mere existence.

Edited February 3, 2007 by KBI

[The Vargman]

Fair counterpoint. I would offer this counter to your counter: ONE or TWO lamppost or guardrail hides are probably neat or creative to the new cacher. 50, 100 or more? Not so sure about that. THAT's the issue.

 

Understood. So I'll offer this kitchen counter to your counter of my counter and put it on the counter table:

Is it okay for the number seekers to do so? I don't see them really interfering much with those that want to skip them. I suppose if all of the micros prevented the other ones from getting placed (which I can't see happening too much geographically) it might interfere. Not that I'm suggesting a change (and perhaps I'm likely not the first to mention it), but perhaps the .10 guideline should be flexed by certain reviewers to allow a larger container nearby ones like this if this is that much of a problem in their area. Other than that, I don't truly see much harm in their activities. I see it as they're just caching their way.

[+drat19]

Read my post directly above yours. Unlike most people around here, I'm not sitting here behind my keyboard puffing more righteous indignation anonymously than I would if the discussion were in person. I gave that post its proper due and respect.

Then why did you issue a formal request for the thread to be shut down? You never really answered Mushtang's question:

• Instead of begging MM to lock it, why not just NOT click on the link?
  

 

... or mine. I posted what I thought were some clear and reasonable questions as well:

• If you don't like seeing the issue discussed anymore, then why continue to read the thread?
  
• If you're NOT reading the thread, does it bother you that others are continuing to discuss the issue in a thread you're NOT reading?
  
• If so, does that give you any legitimate say as to whether the thread you're NOT reading should be shut down?
  

 

You danced around the answer a bit:

 

I'm similarly tired of this thread...and yet I still check in on it.

Why? That's what I'm asking. If you're tired of it, why torture yourself?

 

I will say one thing, though: I was THRILLED when this page finally dropped to page 2 a few days ago, before the horse was brought back to life for further beatings.

If you were THRILLED that the thread dropped off the first page, then shouldn't you be THRILLED to know that you possess the power NOT to click on the thread at all?

 

When it was revived and I saw that I was the target, I guess I felt no choice but to respond.

"Felt no choice?" Please explain. Is there a gun to your head?

 

I don’t mean to sound snarky (I apologize if I do), and I’m not picking on you personally. You’re just one of the many, many people who consistently react to long-running debates by complaining that they’re unpleasant to read – or worse, by asking for them to be shut down even while others are obviously enjoying the discussion.

 

My questions are right on topic: Such a reaction to threads like this one serves as a perfect analogy. The response we keep hearing from the folks who express strong dislike for a certain flavor of geocache is reasonable in itself, yet many of these people either continue to hunt them – or worse, they call for them to be controlled somehow even while others are obviously enjoying them.

 

Why? I’ve yet to be convinced that “lame” caches are difficult to detect (I’m not that smart and I have never had trouble detecting them – I don’t even use PQs) , and neither have I been convinced that the game suffers due to there mere existence.

I don't have a reasonable point-by-point response to your questions...so if it makes you feel better/superior to feel that you've "won" this part of the debate, by all means feel that way...and congratulations. My pride is still intact, even sitting here anonymously behind my keyboard as opposed to in person having this discussion with you. (I'm always amazed at the courage people have hiding behind their keyboards and web nicknames that they wouldn't have in person...not necessarily referring to you in this case, KBI.)

 

As to the Micro Spew discussion, we agree to disagree. I've been playing the game for almost 5 years and I've watched the evolution, and I believe the widespread outbreak is, and has been, bad for the game. Many others agree with me.

 

You don't. Many others agree with you too. I can live with that. Neither of us has to be "right", you know. As I stated elsewhere in this thread and all over these forums, I sadly admit that clearly the "community" has spoken, and it wants Spew. I don't have to like it, and I will feel free to b*tch about it until the moderators ban me. You and everyone else have the option to plonk me if you don't want to keep reading about it.

[+KBI]

OK, while I still believe "the numbers" is the primary reason for Micro Spew,

There's nothing wrong with that preference. There's nothing wrong with enjoing watching that little odometer next to one's name increase with each find. It's a matter of personal preference.

 

...here's another possible reason: As the game has become more mainstream, there's the convenience factor.

 

We were having a discussion about the urban micro explosion a while back at a Twin Cities caching get-together I attended. Someone said, "Well, I don't want to have to drive more than 5 miles for a cache when there are still places where they could be hidden closer by." I nearly fainted.

You nearly fainted because someone expressed a preference for a style of caching that is different from your own personal preference?

 

Before the urban micro explosion, it was not uncommon for cachers to clear out their own radius and then have to drive 10, 20, 50, or more miles to find their next nearest caches. And we did it WILLINGLY...

That guy's comment about close caches sounds quite reasonable to me. Who are you to even suggest that he should prefer to drive farther? How does the fact that his preference differs from yours negatively affect you? How does driving farther to get to a cache make it more entertaining or enjoyable? How is convenience bad for caching?

 

it was an opportunity to explore "uncharted territory" that was still within a relatively close distance.

You're always welcome to drive right past all those close-in hides to get to the ones you prefer.

 

Times have changed...cachers want their caches and they want them as convenient as possible. Some folks have cited the rising cost of gasoline in the past few years, but I say that's bunk...cachers are generally an upper-middle-class or higher lot, and don't tell me that driving from cache to cache to cache (to cache to cache to cache....) around town doesn't use up as much gas as driving out into the country.

Translation (as I hear it): "People who play the game different from how I think they shouyld play aren't just different. The're WRONG."

[+KBI]

I'm always amazed at the courage people have hiding behind their keyboards and web nicknames that they wouldn't have in person...not necessarily referring to you in this case, KBI.

Good, because if you and I were discussing this over a beer I'd be happy to say the very same things I'm posting here, and to ask you the very same questions. And I'd buy the beer.

[+Kit Fox]

Well, to bring this thread a back into the topic a bit more and perhaps save, what I find (perhaps because I'm a noob) to be an interesting topic thread...

 

Is there anyone else that doesn't exactly see "the numbers" as part of the issue? Mind you I do note the point that it could have been the reason for the spread of the urban micro.

 

Here is my take on the explosion of urban, uncreative hides.

 

Caching has become quite popular with retired folks, sedentary people, as well as disabled people. This created a "niche market" for easy terrain finds that appealed to cachers who don't like five-hour hikes. This type of cacher wanted to "give back" to the geocommunity, and they spread the second generation of "easy caches." The race for smileys, in pursuit of "perceived status," has caused a real explosion of easy caches.

 

Now a someone who is grossly out of shape, or in a wheelchair can have more finds, than someone who only finds 3 star terrain or higher caches. When you go to event caches, and visit the local forums, you continually see congratulatory threads expounding on said cacher's latest milestone. Since "find count" is so important, as well as how many finds you made in 24 hours, the race to find easy caches has taken over.

 

I'll give a great example of how this has affected the game. There is a parking lot for a scenic trail, that leads to a scenic waterfall, or some other natural wonder. Cacher A hides a cache at the scenic view. Everyone who finds Cacher A's cache write long "found it" logs, and takes lots of pictures.

 

Then comes along Cacher B who dislikes hiking, and places a "park and grab" cache at the trail parking spot. Cacher B's caches gets ten times as many finds as Cacher A's cache. This is the "new numbers game."

[+drat19]

Fair counterpoint. I would offer this counter to your counter: ONE or TWO lamppost or guardrail hides are probably neat or creative to the new cacher. 50, 100 or more? Not so sure about that. THAT's the issue.

 

Understood. So I'll offer this kitchen counter to your counter of my counter and put it on the counter table:

Is it okay for the number seekers to do so? I don't see them really interfering much with those that want to skip them. I suppose if all of the micros prevented the other ones from getting placed (which I can't see happening too much geographically) it might interfere. Not that I'm suggesting a change (and perhaps I'm likely not the first to mention it), but perhaps the .10 guideline should be flexed by certain reviewers to allow a larger container nearby ones like this if this is that much of a problem in their area. Other than that, I don't truly see much harm in their activities. I see it as they're just caching their way.

Once again, I think you make valid counterpoints. I think at the heart of the matter is that, as a non-newb, I've watched the evolution of the game since I started playing almost 5 years ago, and I preferred it "old school"...when the numbers really were comparable. I enjoyed the friendly competition for stats, and I enjoyed the fact that while compiling my high (at the time - pre'04) stats, I pretty much enjoyed high-quality caching experiences along the way. I don't see that being the case anymore. I had to sacrifice the stats game in order to continue to enjoy my caching...and to me, having to sacrifice the stats part of the game in order to do that took away some of my overall enjoyment. YMMV.

[+drat19]

I'm always amazed at the courage people have hiding behind their keyboards and web nicknames that they wouldn't have in person...not necessarily referring to you in this case, KBI.

Good, because if you and I were discussing this over a beer I'd be happy to say the very same things I'm posting here, and to ask you the very same questions. And I'd buy the beer.

Sounds good. I have family members who live in Cumming...that may well happen one day.

[+drat19]

Well, to bring this thread a back into the topic a bit more and perhaps save, what I find (perhaps because I'm a noob) to be an interesting topic thread...

 

Is there anyone else that doesn't exactly see "the numbers" as part of the issue? Mind you I do note the point that it could have been the reason for the spread of the urban micro.

 

Here is my take on the explosion of urban, uncreative hides.

 

Caching has become quite popular with retired folks, sedentary people, as well as disabled people. This created a "niche market" for easy terrain finds that appealed to cachers who don't like five-hour hikes. This type of cacher wanted to "give back" to the geocommunity, and they spread the second generation of "easy caches." The race for smileys, in pursuit of "perceived status," has caused a real explosion of easy caches.

 

Now a someone who is grossly out of shape, or in a wheelchair can have more finds, than someone who only finds 3 star terrain or higher caches. When you go to event caches, and visit the local forums, you continually see congratulatory threads expounding on said cacher's latest milestone. Since "find count" is so important, as well as how many finds you made in 24 hours, the race to find easy caches has taken over.

 

I'll give a great example of how this has affected the game. There is a parking lot for a scenic trail, that leads to a scenic waterfall, or some other natural wonder. Cacher A hides a cache at the scenic view. Everyone who finds Cacher A's cache write long "found it" logs, and takes lots of pictures.

 

Then comes along Cacher B who dislikes hiking, and places a "park and grab" cache at the trail parking spot. Cacher B's caches gets ten times as many finds as Cacher A's cache. This is the "new numbers game."

Thank you, KF...well stated.

[+KBI]

I don't have a reasonable point-by-point response to your questions...so if it makes you feel better/superior to feel that you've "won" this part of the debate, by all means feel that way...and congratulations.

Does that mean that you now agree it was unreasonable to issue a formal request for the thread to be shut down?

 

And BTW, thanks for being so honest. I respect that -- more than you know. I'm always happy to admit when someone has convinced me to change my mind as well, but most folks seem to prefer to either resort to personal attacks, or just stop posting. It's not a "win" for me, just a clarification. Hopefully others will get something out of it as well.

 

And like I said, if it's ME who is ultimately wrong about al this, I still want to know.

Edited February 3, 2007 by KBI

[+drat19]

Does that mean that you now agree it was unreasonable to issue a formally request for the thread to be shut down?

Well actually, at the time I made that request, that BC-based cacher was getting a bit out of hand with the personal attacks...at the time, it WAS time. Things have calmed down since then, obviously. (And by plonking him, I no longer have to see his attacks.)

[+KBI]

I'm always amazed at the courage people have hiding behind their keyboards and web nicknames that they wouldn't have in person...not necessarily referring to you in this case, KBI.

Good, because if you and I were discussing this over a beer I'd be happy to say the very same things I'm posting here, and to ask you the very same questions. And I'd buy the beer.

Sounds good. I have family members who live in Cumming...that may well happen one day.

There's a joint right down the road where they have over 100 varieties ... on tap!

 

Let's submit it as an Event Cache! One smiley logged for each different beer sampled?

[+drat19]

I'm always amazed at the courage people have hiding behind their keyboards and web nicknames that they wouldn't have in person...not necessarily referring to you in this case, KBI.

Good, because if you and I were discussing this over a beer I'd be happy to say the very same things I'm posting here, and to ask you the very same questions. And I'd buy the beer.

Sounds good. I have family members who live in Cumming...that may well happen one day.

There's a joint right down the road where they have over 100 varieties ... on tap!

 

Let's submit it as an Event Cache! One smiley logged for each different beer sampled?

Oh God, let's not get THAT argument started!

 

I lived in the ATL for 5 years (Duluth)...my car tends to steer itself away from the ATL now. But I do still visit from time to time, so I'll keep that in mind and look you up.

 

Maybe our BC "friend" can take a cue from this discussion and realize that it's possible to respectfully agree to disagree and not make it personal.

Edited February 3, 2007 by drat19

[+KBI]

I'll give a great example of how this has affected the game.

 

There is a parking lot for a scenic trail, that leads to a scenic waterfall, or some other natural wonder. Cacher A hides a cache at the scenic view. Everyone who finds Cacher A's cache write long "found it" logs, and takes lots of pictures.

 

Then comes along Cacher B who dislikes hiking, and places a "park and grab" cache at the trail parking spot. Cacher B's caches gets ten times as many finds as Cacher A's cache. This is the "new numbers game."

That's an interesting story, and it does sound typical, but I must have missed the part where you explained how the park and grab negatively affects anything.

[+drat19]

I'll give a great example of how this has affected the game.

 

There is a parking lot for a scenic trail, that leads to a scenic waterfall, or some other natural wonder. Cacher A hides a cache at the scenic view. Everyone who finds Cacher A's cache write long "found it" logs, and takes lots of pictures.

 

Then comes along Cacher B who dislikes hiking, and places a "park and grab" cache at the trail parking spot. Cacher B's caches gets ten times as many finds as Cacher A's cache. This is the "new numbers game."

That's an interesting story, and it does sound typical, but I must have missed the part where you explained how the park and grab negatively affects anything.

To me, it takes a lot more effort to separate the wheat from the chaff when you have to sift through so many more parking lot hides to find that waterfall. That's negative. It's not the one parking lot cache at that trailhead...it's the 50-100-more of them just like it that flood the search radius.

 

Again, I preferred it when the waterfall cache was the only option in the area. Others are happy there are now more choices. I think it was a better game without those choices...when you could introduce a friend/family member to the game, and whatever cache you chose to bring them to as their "first" could pretty much be expected to be memorable/interesting/worthwhile.

 

Think about all the news stories we've seen where the reporter follows a cacher to a cache to "show the viewing audience". True, some of those reporters DO make reference to urban hides, but do they ever SHOW them on camera? Very rarely. (I think I did see it shown ONCE.) They always show the trail/woods/waterfall hike. That used to be the norm in our game. No longer.

 

In fact, imagine if a reporter showed the audience the typical parking lot lampskirt hide. Can you imagine the backlash we would get, in our terrorist-paranoid world nowadays??

Edited February 3, 2007 by drat19

[+KBI]

As to the Micro Spew discussion, we agree to disagree. I've been playing the game for almost 5 years and I've watched the evolution, and I believe the widespread outbreak is, and has been, bad for the game. Many others agree with me.

Again, the response we keep hearing from the folks like yourself who express strong dislike for a certain flavor of geocache is reasonable in itself, yet many of these people – like yourself – either continue to hunt them – or worse, they call for them to be controlled somehow even while others are obviously enjoying them.

 

Why? I’ve yet to be convinced that “lame” caches are difficult to detect (I’m not that smart and I have never had any trouble detecting them – I don’t even use PQs), and neither have I been convinced that the game suffers due to there mere existence.

 

You don't [agree]. Many others agree with you too. I can live with that. Neither of us has to be "right", you know. As I stated elsewhere in this thread and all over these forums, I sadly admit that clearly the "community" has spoken, and it wants Spew. I don't have to like it, and I will feel free to b*tch about it until the moderators ban me.

Why?

 

Why whine about something you can't control? Why let it bother you when there's no reason to let it bother you? Why make yourself miserable?

 

You and everyone else have the option to plonk me if you don't want to keep reading about it.

Yes, I've always understood that putting my fingers in my ears and singing LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA is an option. It's just not one I prefer to use.