Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
Aushiker

"Liar Caches"

Recommended Posts

I've seen a similar cache in my area. I would hate to think that people were travelling from very far away and spending extra money on gear and travel just to find the cache.

 

The one that is local ...I forget the name of it now but I know when you looked at the name of the cache you could tell it was a joke. I would hope they were all like that.

Share this post


Link to post

I think that if the cache description suggests, recommends or even just hints that you will need to hire or buy "specialised equipment" when you don't actually need it, then that is most definitely out of order and should be reported to the cache reviewers! :laughing:

 

I'd be pretty hacked off with a setter who thought it might be funny to hear in the log about how much money I'd wasted finding their cache!

 

On the other hand, I have done caches where previous finders have written extraodinary logs detailing how much trouble they had in finding the cache! Usually though after re-reading the cache description and checking the difficulty and terrain rating it becomes obvious that they are just having a laugh. (None of these caches though have hinted at needing special equipment).

Share this post


Link to post

I know I would be a little ticked off if I was expecting some major adventure and found out it was really a park and grab. I would be major ticked off if I drove a long way to discover this.

Share this post


Link to post

Found this one near hear. Lie-brary

I don't think it is a bad thing if you know up front. If done in a way to decieve people into thinking it is something it's not then it is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post

I think that the best source of information on any cache are the previous finders logs. I've yet to see a 'liar's cache' page that didn't have some logs that were so far over the top that you didn't know what you were getting into. :laughing:

 

Or maybe I've never actually found a liars cache. <_<

Share this post


Link to post

If someone was going to do this cache, after reading the description on the cache page, wouldn't it be logical to look at a map first? Looking at Google Maps, and Topozone show that the cache is about .2 miles from a road, on almost level ground, and there appear to be small trails in the area. If you are going to go spend money on special equipment without checking these basic things first, maybe you shouldn't be out in the woods in the first place? :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

I only had to look at the map and read a couple logs to recognize what this is...I mean people claim to be bringing stilts, rope ladders, cordless saws and gas lanterns. I think it's pretty obvious it's a liar's cache, but again, I suppose if you've never heard of one or realized they existed, you might not catch on.

 

If I was driving a long distance to this cache, I would verify with the cache owner what kindof equipment to bring (as with any high-difficulty-terrain cache), and then I would hope that he would point out that maybe I shouldn't be driving 2 or 3 hundred miles for the cache.

 

I particularly like how the difficulty is only 4.5 though...lends that sense of realism.

 

As far as liar's caches go, I'm not a big fan of them, for the same reason the OP points out. Unless it's blatantly obvious, it could lead to bad experiences. The cache in question here is pretty subtle. Granted the coordinates for the parking are really close to the first stage, but since it's a multi, you can't count on that being a good indicator of the difficulty.

Edited by ThePropers

Share this post


Link to post

The last post makes too much sense.

 

i know i am new, and some of you dyed-in-the-wool- cachers out there may take my opinion worth a grain of salt, but that is exactly it. if you are so die-hard as to get special equipment and "training" to go after one like that, you prolly have access to some maps or other sources of necessary info. i think that people just want to have things laid out for them and aren't willing to do the work necessary for something like that. anyway, i think if you lose your faith in caching over something like that (like the article referred to), then your faith was pretty thin in the first place. my 2 pennies.

 

top con

Share this post


Link to post
Found it. GCNT03
That's not it. It's this one. I'm nearly positive has been a thread about this very group and their attempt at this cache.

 

I am not a fan of liars caches. I firmly believe that the difficulty and terrain ratings should be accurate and that the cache description should give only correct information. If people get used to not being able to trust the ratings and description, we run the risk of people going after caches that are truly dangerous and not being prepared. Some could certainly get injured or worse. I suspect that if GC.com is aware of these misratings, then a talented lawyer could pierce the protections provided by the disclaimer.

 

As far as the article goes, I liked it. She has moxie.

Share this post


Link to post
... If I was driving a long distance to this cache, I would verify with the cache owner what kindof equipment to bring (as with any high-difficulty-terrain cache), and then I would hope that he would point out that maybe I shouldn't be driving 2 or 3 hundred miles for the cache. ...
If it is the cache and the group that I'm thinking of, I think that they did contact the owner prior to the trip.

Share this post


Link to post

I think that the best source of information on any cache are the previous finders logs. I've yet to see a 'liar's cache' page that didn't have some logs that were so far over the top that you didn't know what you were getting into. :laughing:

 

Or maybe I've never actually found a liars cache. :unsure:

Well, to me, this matter of "tal tale" caches is a matter of personal opinion and preference. I happen to like well-designed and well-executed tall tale caches myself. However, having said that, I happen to firmly believe, as I have stated before, that a tall tale cache must be categorized by the owner only as a mystery/puzzle (aka "?" or riddle) cache, due to the special additional logging requirements. I do NOT like seeing tall tale caches categorized as traditional or multi-stage caches; I feel that this can cross the line of being too misleading.

 

As I mentioned above, I happen to like such caches when they have been very well-crafted by their creator and particularly if the early finders helped to build the myth and turn it into a really fun tale, with just the right amount of silliness and impossibility. Some of my favorite caches have been tall tale caches. In fact, judging by the content of some past threads on this topic of tall tale caches, much as seems to be true for several well-known high-volume posters on this forum. It is also true that in some cases, I have traveled long distances just to tackle such tale caches, knowing that they were tall tale caches. And, two other well-known tall tale caches located between 300 and 900 miles from my home are still high on my "want to do" list, and I will get to them someday. On the other hand, there are some tall tale caches that, to me, are just kinda silly and boring (or is a better word banal?) and, even though they may be located in my area, I simply choose to ignore them. So, for me, it all comes down to a matter of personal preference, just as some of us love guardrail and lamppost skirt urban micros and some hate them, and some of us love bacon and eggs for breakfast while others will only eat grits with fried grasshoppers and butter for breakfast.

 

What kinda amazes me in the case cited by the OP is that it appears that both the author of the news article and the team of finders cited chose such an extreme response as that of publicly "exposing" the tall tale nature of the cache. To me, this sounds very judgemental and rather fundamentalist and extreme, and I could personally only remotely justify such a response if there had been some very serious deception involved, with no hints as to the true nature of the cache, and/or if the cache had been miscategorized as a traditional or multi instead of as a puzzle/riddle cache (the latter to indicate the additional requirements.)

 

Much as wimseyguy pointed out in his earlier post cited above, it has been my experience that it is ALWAYS possible to discern if a cache is a tall tale cache, even if the owner has miscategorized it as a traditional or multi. However, we live in an era of fast food, power caching, grab and go caches, fast fixes and sound bites, and I notice with some dismay that more and more cachers nowadays are choosing to seek caches without first carefully reading the cache listing page, and instead they just blindly forge ahead using only the waypoint coordinates which some generic mass-download program generically dumped into their GPSr from the gc.com site. This type of casual "blind" is of particular concern to me as the owner of a number of extreme terrain caches that could easily get a seeker killed if they did not know what they were getting into. In that vein, Snoogans shared a great cautionary tale here about 10 months ago about some ill-prepared seekers -- who had never read the cache listing page -- of one of his extreme cachers who blundered onto posted private property and were almost killed. Likewise, from my vantage point here, I have witnessed my share of bizarre misdventures because a cacher failed to read the cache listing page for an extreme cache. In fact, because of this phenomenon of not reading cache listing pages, more and more owners of extreme caches -- including myself -- are taking the extra precautionay step of not listing the acutal cache starting coordinates as the primary coordinates listed at the top of the cache listing page (and blindly downloaded to GPSrs by mass-download programs) and rather either burying the actual coordinates in text form in the text body of of the description or even posting prerequisite screening requirements for seeking the cche, where those who meet the requirements must contact the cache owner to obtain the true cache coordinates.

 

In closing, allow me to repeat: I have never seen, and I have never heard of, a tall tale cache whhose true nature would not become immediately obvious to any intelligent geocacher if they were to read the cache listing page and the previous logs carefully, and if they were to exercise other nominal due diligence such as looking at the maps and the topo maps linked from the cache listing page. <_<

Share this post


Link to post

Here's the event page for the cache run for the group from Minnesota to Wisconsin. You will note the 11/11 log 'I was assured this isn't a decoy tough cache- I hope it is as tough as it sounds and that you all have a GRAND ADVENTURE. If it turns out to be an easy cache- at least you all had a gathering and a fun time.'

 

Apparently, there was some doubt, but assurances were given that it wasn't a liar's cache.

Share this post


Link to post

To be fair, I shot a quick email to the author of the article to let her know about the thread.

Share this post


Link to post

To the best of my knowledge I have one of the oldest liars caches around placed in July of 2002, later even flew from Nashville to Texas to do only one cache and it was a liars cache but knew it before leaving because of the previous logs

 

Had a blast it was Toooooooooo COOL, after doing the cache met up with a bunch of really great local cachers over drinks and good food, them flew back home

 

There are so many variations of the game is why I love it so much. If you don’t read the cache page before going, oh well

 

Joe

Share this post


Link to post
To the best of my knowledge I have one of the oldest liars caches around placed in July of 2002, later even flew from Nashville to Texas to do only one cache and it was a liars cache but knew it before leaving because of the previous logs

 

Had a blast it was Toooooooooo COOL, after doing the cache met up with a bunch of really great local cachers over drinks and good food, them flew back home. ...

I really enjoyed your cache, but I'm not sure that I would have if I had set up a trip to come see it after being assured that it was the real deal.

 

Do you think that you would feel the same if they had told you that it wasn't a liar's cache and you didn't find out until you had made the expensive trip? I think that point is at the crux of the writer's angst.

Share this post


Link to post

To the best of my knowledge I have one of the oldest liars caches around placed in July of 2002, later even flew from Nashville to Texas to do only one cache and it was a liars cache but knew it before leaving because of the previous logs

 

Had a blast it was Toooooooooo COOL, after doing the cache met up with a bunch of really great local cachers over drinks and good food, them flew back home

 

There are so many variations of the game is why I love it so much. If you don’t read the cache page before going, oh well

 

Joe

I agree with you 100%, and in fact, for me too, a tall tale cache (yes, I knew all along what it was) in the same area that you mention was on my very short "to do" list for a long time , and finally, one year after I put it on my "to do" list, I was able to fly from Maryland to Texas to tackle it, and had a blast. In fact, two very active local cachers -- both of whom were also fully aware that it was a tall tale cache -- expressed chagrin upon my return that they had been unable to find the time and budget to travel there to tackle that cache as well. To my best knowledge. at least one of them still plans to eventually get down there to tackle it. So, there are many different types of caches, and we all have different preferences -- some like coffee, some like tea, and some like fried grasshoppers! But, I must say, as you do, woe to those who do not read cache listing pages closely or who fail to do their due diligence, for they may get a surprise!

Share this post


Link to post
Found it. GCNT03
That's not it. It's this one. I'm nearly positive has been a thread about this very group and their attempt at this cache.

 

I am not a fan of liars caches. I firmly believe that the difficulty and terrain ratings should be accurate and that the cache description should give only correct information. If people get used to not being able to trust the ratings and description, we run the risk of people going after caches that are truly dangerous and not being prepared. Some could certainly get injured or worse. I suspect that if GC.com is aware of these misratings, then a talented lawyer could pierce the protections provided by the disclaimer.

 

As far as the article goes, I liked it. She has moxie.

 

Oh, well that one is even more obvious that it's a liar's cache. One guy even said he went back to the car, got a saw, and built his own bridge to cross a crevice. Good stuff.

 

I thought the other one seemed a little too subtle for a liar's cache.

Share this post


Link to post
In fact, because of this phenomenon of not reading cache listing pages, more and more owners of extreme caches -- including myself -- are taking the extra precautionay step of not listing the acutal cache starting coordinates as the primary coordinates listed at the top of the cache listing page (and blindly downloaded to GPSrs by mass-download programs) and rather either burying the actual coordinates in text form in the text body of of the description or even posting prerequisite screening requirements for seeking the cche, where those who meet the requirements must contact the cache owner to obtain the true cache coordinates.

Aren't caches that require you to contact the owner for the true coords a violation of the placement guidelines? What kinds of issues do you have getting those approved?

 

-eP

Share this post


Link to post

I think that the best source of information on any cache are the previous finders logs. I've yet to see a 'liar's cache' page that didn't have some logs that were so far over the top that you didn't know what you were getting into.

 

I agree. A couple of times not I've seen discussion of some cache or other that piqued my interest enough to go look at the listing, and it was very obvious from the logs that it was a liars cache. The recurring stories about how groups of people prepare for elaborate cache assaults and travel long distances, only to be angry when they discover the truth baffle me. Would you put that much effort into going to a cache and not look at the previous logs? I wouldn't!

Share this post


Link to post

Aren't caches that require you to contact the owner for the true coords a violation of the placement guidelines?

 

I don't think so, or at least if they are, exceptions occur all the time. The DeLorme challenge (in Illinois, at least - I never checked other states) requires that you complete the 1-find-per-page minimum, then contact the listing owner for the final coordinates.

Share this post


Link to post

If someone was going to do this cache, after reading the description on the cache page, wouldn't it be logical to look at a map first? Looking at Google Maps, and Topozone show that the cache is about .2 miles from a road, on almost level ground, and there appear to be small trails in the area. If you are going to go spend money on special equipment without checking these basic things first, maybe you shouldn't be out in the woods in the first place? :laughing:

 

If cachers are foolish enough to invest in Chain Saws, Rappelling Equipment, and or any other specialized equipment, without some research like checking maps, or even consulting the owner, they have nothing to complain about.

 

How many cachers do you know that would break down, and spend three hundreds dollars on ropes, harnesses , Descenders, ETC, for one cache? Some cachers need to lighten up a bit.

 

 

Liar's Caches should never be discussed on the forums. <_<

Edited by Kit Fox

Share this post


Link to post
I think that the best source of information on any cache are the previous finders logs. I've yet to see a 'liar's cache' page that didn't have some logs that were so far over the top that you didn't know what you were getting into.
I agree. A couple of times not I've seen discussion of some cache or other that piqued my interest enough to go look at the listing, and it was very obvious from the logs that it was a liars cache. The recurring stories about how groups of people prepare for elaborate cache assaults and travel long distances, only to be angry when they discover the truth baffle me. Would you put that much effort into going to a cache and not look at the previous logs? I wouldn't!
Many people don't read the logs because they don't want spoilers. You might have noticed that there is a warning related to this on every cache page.
Aren't caches that require you to contact the owner for the true coords a violation of the placement guidelines?
I don't think so, or at least if they are, exceptions occur all the time. The DeLorme challenge (in Illinois, at least - I never checked other states) requires that you complete the 1-find-per-page minimum, then contact the listing owner for the final coordinates.
Those caches have received an exception from TPTB.

Share this post


Link to post
If cachers are foolish enough to invest in Chain Saws, Rappelling Equipment, and or any other specialized equipment, without some research like checking maps, or even consulting the owner, they have nothing to complain about. ...
Ummm, you might want to reread the thread and links. The cache owner was contacted and ensured the group that the cache was the real deal.

Share this post


Link to post
If cachers are foolish enough to invest in Chain Saws, Rappelling Equipment, and or any other specialized equipment, without some research like checking maps, or even consulting the owner, they have nothing to complain about. ...
Ummm, you might want to reread the thread and links. The cache owner was contacted and ensured the group that the cache was the real deal.

 

I was referring to liar caches in general. The owner of this cache went way too far. If I ever hide a liars cache, I'll be honest with cachers if they email me privately.

 

From ther story:

 

Yes, there were "hints" in the Gauntlet narrative, such as advice to read the logs closely. As some-one later wrote, all a person had to do was check the logs to see that the finders went on to find numer-ous caches the same day, which would have shown the Gauntlet hunt certainly did not fill up a whole day. That's all fine and good, but not everyone will do that research, or, while it's not tough, even know how to go about that type of research.

 

To me, it comes down to this. If you don't know there's such a thing as a liar's cache, how are you going to know you should be reading the cache listing with a healthy dose of skepticism? Even when it does sound crazy, but everyone has found it?

Edited by Kit Fox

Share this post


Link to post

. . .To me, it comes down to this. If you don't know there's such a thing as a liar's cache, how are you going to know you should be reading the cache listing with a healthy dose of skepticism? Even when it does sound crazy, but everyone has found it?

Well, after re-reading this statement from the article cited originally, I must say that I always read closely the cache listing page and past logs for ANY extreme terrain cache which I am contemplating tackling, and even moreso if the listing/story sounds unreal, crazy, or too wild, and even moreso if there are few DNFS and everyone has scored a find. Again, I call that simple due diligence, and I would exercise that in any area of life, not just in the realm of seeking a cache with an extreme terrain rating.

 

And now, this seems the right time and place to come out of the closet and admit the ugly truth -- a truth that most of you have suspected all along:

Yes, it is true that we may have gained a bit of fame or infamy for the so-called "extreme terrain" caches in our Psycho Urban Caches and Psycho Backcountry Caches series. However, it is now time to tell the truth, that the fame and infamy were ill-earned and were part of a hoax, for all lies must come to an eventual end. Let the truth be known: All of our Psycho caches in both Psycho cache series are really tall tale caches and their true D/T ratings are all 1/1 or 1.5/1.5 at most. And, in reality, the actual cache in each case is a single-stage traditional microcache, where the container is magnetic keyholder placed on the guardrail of the parking lot/parking area, or under a nearby lamppost skirt! And all those log entries and photos of the cache hide sites or of seekers finding the Psycho caches were faked in Adobe Photoshop by a digital graphics artist located in Cincinatti, Ohio. Likewise, the log entries were faked by a small advertising copy agency in Miami, Florida. So, all our Psycho caches were a total hoax, a total deception. <_<:laughing:B)

 

 

 

I think.

 

 

 

I guess.

 

 

 

 

Maybe.

 

 

 

 

:unsure::drama::D:D

 

:DB)

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team

Share this post


Link to post

Late edit note! Oops! System burped, and two identical copies of my above post appeared in the forum thread. I have deleted the copy in this one, to avoid confusion and to prevent adversive visual Feng Shui or negative Baubiologie omens.

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team

Share this post


Link to post

To the best of my knowledge I have one of the oldest liars caches around placed in July of 2002, later even flew from Nashville to Texas to do only one cache and it was a liars cache but knew it before leaving because of the previous logs

 

Had a blast it was Toooooooooo COOL, after doing the cache met up with a bunch of really great local cachers over drinks and good food, them flew back home

 

There are so many variations of the game is why I love it so much. If you don’t read the cache page before going, oh well

 

Joe

I agree with you 100%, and in fact, for me too, a tall tale cache (yes, I knew all along what it was) in the same area that you mention was on my very short "to do" list for a long time , and finally, one year after I put it on my "to do" list, I was able to fly from Maryland to Texas to tackle it, and had a blast. In fact, two very active local cachers -- both of whom were also fully aware that it was a tall tale cache -- expressed chagrin upon my return that they had been unable to find the time and budget to travel there to tackle that cache as well. To my best knowledge. at least one of them still plans to eventually get down there to tackle it. So, there are many different types of caches, and we all have different preferences -- some like coffee, some like tea, and some like fried grasshoppers! But, I must say, as you do, woe to those who do not read cache listing pages closely or who fail to do their due diligence, for they may get a surprise!

 

As BadAndy described in his TC article the popinjay (good word BTW) on a cache like mentioned in the OP can be a laughable position to put one's self in. The article by Lisa Brainerd pops all over the place and with no small measure of sour grapes. Poor journalistic form IMO. I hope she's satisfied that cache was archived. OOOooOOoo what a tremendious feeling of POWER. B)

 

I.E. All the adults are enjoying Christmas after the kids go to bed when one of the chil'uns pops into the living room to inform all the adults that SANTA CLAUS DOESN'T IN FACT EXIST. Well then. Everyone outta the pool. Party's OVER....... NOT.

 

Quoting Lisa Brainerd's article:

It's just my theory. Let me know if you feel differently. After all, a lot of people were sad to see the cache go, since it's now been ar-chived by the owner.

 

I feel differently Lisa. :drama:

 

I understand likely more than one put in perhaps $400 on conditioning and gear.

 

What exactly IS conditioning? Is she saying they worked out FOR NOTHING and wasted valuable couch time? What exact equipment was purchased for a one time use on this particular cache?

 

Consumer Reports or the Better Business Bureau wouldn't have let this cache fly in the up-front world of consumer business dealings - which, of course, this isn't.

 

Personally, I would have gone bigger with the name dropping. I.E. The President of the United States would have shipped that cache owner off to Guantanimo with the rest of the terrorists. :D

 

Yes, there were "hints" in the Gauntlet narrative, such as advice to read the logs closely. As some-one later wrote, all a person had to do was check the logs to see that the finders went on to find numer-ous caches the same day, which would have shown the Gauntlet hunt certainly did not fill up a whole day. That's all fine and good, but not everyone will do that research, or, while it's not tough, even know how to go about that type of research.

 

To me, it comes down to this. If you don't know there's such a thing as a liar's cache, how are you going to know you should be reading the cache listing with a healthy dose of skepticism? Even when it does sound crazy, but everyone has found it?

 

My goodness the entitlement and misconceptions displayed.....

 

Since people hadn't heard of liar's caches - and given the ten-dencies mentioned immediately above - there was no real reason to believe the cache was anything other than promised.

 

What people? EVERYONE? How evian uhhh, I mean, naive.

 

But the Gauntlet has put doubt into my previously happy, childlike joy of finding caches.

 

There ya go folks. A liars cache killed Santa Claus. She even mentioned Santa in her article.

 

The letter stated that sure, this person had been "suckered" into finding the cache, but then got a chuckle out of it. That would be another guess as to why no one exposed the liar's cache earlier. All the finders were fooled. So wouldn't it be better to hang with fellow "foolees," laugh about your decision to hunt the cache, then sit back and watch more people get fooled - than to admit you were fooled?

 

Yes. Yessiree.

 

Most adults have a sense of humor that goes TWO WAYS. They have the ability to laugh at themselves and not flashback to a time in the schoolyard when the mean spirited children stood over them pointing and laughing when they fell down.

 

Instead, we (adults) dust ourselves off and join in on the laughter.

 

:laughing:<_<:unsure::DB):DB)

 

normal_santa_dead.jpg

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post

The first liar's cache I did in TN was a complete surprise! I was with a group, on a road trip, we were in a hurry, we debated taking the time for this apparantly challenging cache, decided to attempt it late at night - and loved it!

 

It remains my favorite cache to this day!

 

I have found a couple of liars caches since then and all were fun.

 

This is a GAME where you never know what you'll find, it's best to be open-minded!

Share this post


Link to post
If cachers are foolish enough to invest in Chain Saws, Rappelling Equipment, and or any other specialized equipment, without some research like checking maps, or even consulting the owner, they have nothing to complain about. ...
Ummm, you might want to reread the thread and links. The cache owner was contacted and ensured the group that the cache was the real deal.

 

Unless the accusing parties want to show some proof, it's ALL hearsay. Including this: I was in contact with the cache owner when this first blew up and they refused to defend themselves publicly, but insisted those claims were false. I have the email and NO I won't post it. Hearsay.

Share this post


Link to post

Liar's Caches should never be discussed on the forums. :ph34r:

 

Why not? I'll take my entertainment where ever I can get it..... :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post
One last thing.... What's with all the hyphenated words? Is that a MN thing?

Two things: First, I thought this was going to be your last thing? What's up with the two follow-up posts? :laughing: Second, I think that the hyphens were used to divide words for clean line-breaks in a previously formatted version of the article.

Edited by sbell111

Share this post


Link to post
One last thing.... What's with all the hyphenated words? Is that a MN thing?

Two things: First, I thought this was going to be your last thing? What's up with the two follow-up posts? :laughing: Second, I think that the hyphens were used to divide words for clean line-breaks in a previously formatted version of the article.

 

It took me almost two hours to make the first post while doing stuff around the house. I hadn't noticed the thread had progressed so far while I was formulating my response......... :ph34r::ph34r::D

 

Second, I think that the hyphens were used to divide words for clean line-breaks in a previously formatted version of the article.

 

Oh, OK. Makes sense. :D

 

BTW- I sent a link to the cache owner.

Share this post


Link to post
BTW- I sent a link to the cache owner.
Good idea. I should have done that when I emailed the writer.

Share this post


Link to post

Found this one near hear. Lie-brary

I don't think it is a bad thing if you know up front. If done in a way to decieve people into thinking it is something it's not then it is wrong.

 

Yes, but hardly ever are you told up front like that one. :laughing: I don't have any links available, unless others reference these, but there was a forum thread here a couple of months ago where some out-of-staters held an event, including staying overnight, near to a liars cache in Wisconsin, with the whole purpose of the event being to group hunt what they thought was a very difficult cache. Needless to say, they were not happy. :ph34r:

 

Also, I'm aware of a Liars cache that was in the Kitchener, Ontario area, that a couple of guys drove 200 miles (one way) from Michigan for, also thinking it was a 5/5. They too got extremely ticked off, and the owner archived the cache because of it. I believe that is even mentioned in the Todays Cacher link someone else referenced in this thread.

 

I guess I have no opinion one way or the other, but I'm just pointing out, it can get ugly. Real ugly. :ph34r:

 

Edit, I see the Wisconsin one has been referenced, and archived, just like the other one I referenced in Canada. That one was not mentioned in the todays cacher article. It is here: My most challenging cache

Edited by TheWhiteUrkel

Share this post


Link to post
Yes, but hardly ever are you told up front like that one. :laughing: I don't have any links available, unless others reference these, but there was a forum thread here a couple of months ago where some out-of-staters held an event, including staying overnight, near to a liars cache in Wisconsin, with the whole purpose of the event being to group hunt what they thought was a very difficult cache. Needless to say, they were not happy. :ph34r: ...

The article is about the same trip. I referenced the thread in post 16.

 

(Does anyone remember if Urkel 'plunked' me onto his ignore list?) :ph34r:

Edited by sbell111

Share this post


Link to post

I have one that asks for a "liar" story but I don't exaggerate the terrain or difficulty or container. Simply ask for a "story" about your trip to the cache - given a few themes. No stories about the cache itself or area around it.

Share this post


Link to post

All of our Psycho caches in both Psycho cache series are really tall tale caches and their true D/T ratings are all 1.5/1.5.

 

So that is why it was so easy to log PUC13. :laughing::ph34r::ph34r:

Edited by vyper4

Share this post


Link to post

. . .To me, it comes down to this. If you don't know there's such a thing as a liar's cache, how are you going to know you should be reading the cache listing with a healthy dose of skepticism? Even when it does sound crazy, but everyone has found it?

Well, after re-reading your statement (or perhaps it was part of a note from the finders who complained) above, I always read closely the cache listing page and past logs for ANY extreme terrain cache which I am contemplating tackling, and even moreso if the listing/story sounds unreal, crazy, or too wild, and even moreso if there are few DNFS and everyone has scored a find. Again, I call that simple due diligence, and I would exercise that in any area of life, not just in the realm of seeking a cache with an extreme terrain rating.

 

And now, this seems the right time and place to come out of the closet and admit the ugly truth -- a truth that most of you have suspected all along:

Yes, it is true that we may have gained a bit of fame or infamy for the so-called "extreme terrain" caches in our Psycho Urban Cache series and our Psycho Backcountry Cache series. However, it is now time to tell the truth, that the fame and infamy were ill-earned and a hoax, for all lies must come to an eventual end. All of our Psycho caches in both Psycho cache series are really tall tale caches and their true D/T ratings are all 1.5/1.5. And, in reality, the actual cache in each case is a single-stage traditional microcache, where the container is magnetic keyholder placed on the guardrail of the parking lot/parking area, or under a nearby lamppost skirt! And all those log entries and photos of the cache hide sites or of seekers finding the Psycho caches were faked in Adobe Photoshop by a digital graphics artist located in Cincinatti, Ohio. So, the Psycho caches were a total hoax, a total deception. :ph34r::laughing::ph34r:

 

 

I did not write the "Boy Who Cried Wolf" sentence, Sbell111 did.

Share this post


Link to post

The first liar's cache I did in TN was a complete surprise! I was with a group, on a road trip, we were in a hurry, we debated taking the time for this apparantly challenging cache, decided to attempt it late at night - and loved it!

 

It remains my favorite cache to this day!

 

I have found a couple of liars caches since then and all were fun.

 

This is a GAME where you never know what you'll find, it's best to be open-minded!

Yes, yes, yes! Well said! Ed, may I buy you a dinner someday? :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

. . .To me, it comes down to this. If you don't know there's such a thing as a liar's cache, how are you going to know you should be reading the cache listing with a healthy dose of skepticism? Even when it does sound crazy, but everyone has found it?

Well, after re-reading your statement (or perhaps it was part of a note from the finders who complained) above, I always read closely the cache listing page and past logs for ANY extreme terrain cache which I am contemplating tackling, and even moreso if the listing/story sounds unreal, crazy, or too wild, and even moreso if there are few DNFS and everyone has scored a find. Again, I call that simple due diligence, and I would exercise that in any area of life, not just in the realm of seeking a cache with an extreme terrain rating.

 

And now, this seems the right time and place to come out of the closet and admit the ugly truth -- a truth that most of you have suspected all along:

Yes, it is true that we may have gained a bit of fame or infamy for the so-called "extreme terrain" caches in our Psycho Urban Cache series and our Psycho Backcountry Cache series. However, it is now time to tell the truth, that the fame and infamy were ill-earned and a hoax, for all lies must come to an eventual end. All of our Psycho caches in both Psycho cache series are really tall tale caches and their true D/T ratings are all 1.5/1.5. And, in reality, the actual cache in each case is a single-stage traditional microcache, where the container is magnetic keyholder placed on the guardrail of the parking lot/parking area, or under a nearby lamppost skirt! And all those log entries and photos of the cache hide sites or of seekers finding the Psycho caches were faked in Adobe Photoshop by a digital graphics artist located in Cincinatti, Ohio. So, the Psycho caches were a total hoax, a total deception. :ph34r::laughing::ph34r:

 

 

I did not write the "Boy Who Cried Wolf" sentence, Sbell111 did.

Oops! Thanks for the clarification -- my error in understanding and formatting the original quote for reproduction in my post! :D

Share this post


Link to post

All of our Psycho caches in both Psycho cache series are really tall tale caches and their true D/T ratings are all 1.5/1.5.

 

So that is why it was so easy to log PUC13. :ph34r::D:D

Sigh... folks, I might as well tell you the rest of the ugly story! There is no person named David who uses the geo-handle "Vyper4". Rather, the Vyper4 account is a fictional geo-world web hoax perpetrated by a 113-year woman named Mildred living in a nursing home who has found only one geocache in her life, a 1/1 micro located under a lamppost skirt in the nursing home visitor's parking lot. Mildred, behave yourself! :D:D

 

 

 

 

:D:D:laughing::ph34r:

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team

Share this post


Link to post

. . .As BadAndy described in his TC article the popinjay (good word BTW) on a cache like mentioned in the OP can be a laughable position to put one's self in. The article by Lisa Brainerd pops all over the place and with no small measure of sour grapes. Poor journalistic form IMO. I hope she's satisfied that cache was archived. OOOooOOoo what a tremendious feeling of POWER. :laughing: . . .

Well said, Snoogans! I have not reproduced all of your lengthy post due to space considerations, but thank you for saying that! I too feel that her article reeks of entitlement and sour grapes, and a childish attitude toward the world.

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team

Share this post


Link to post

Well said, Snoogans! I have not reproduced all of your lengthy post due to space consideratiions, but thank you for saying that!

 

Dang I wish you had left in this part:

 

Consumer Reports or the Better Business Bureau wouldn't have let this cache fly in the up-front world of consumer business dealings - which, of course, this isn't.

 

Personally, I would have gone bigger with the name dropping. I.E. The President of the United States would have shipped that cache owner off to Guantanimo with the rest of the terrorists.

 

I know it's bad form to laugh at your own jokes but I'm still chuckling about that one. :laughing:

 

It's like she's saying someone that ISN'T running for office couldn't get elected if they wanted too. I'm not a big fan of Rush Limbaugh, but I remember the reporter who said something similar about him got cut to shreds for it even by their own peers. :ph34r:

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 7

×
×
  • Create New...