To ban or not to ban LPC's

[+Too Tall John]

Interesting article

Yup. It doesn't have anything to do with this thread, but it's interesting.

 

I would disagree. While not a LPC, the cache mentioned in the article was placed on the property of a "Big Box" without permission. (For those who might not know, Shaw's is a big supermarket chain). Thus, an example of what could happen elsewhere. I've done exactly one LPC. It was at a Wal-Mart (see below more on Wally World), and it was the lamppost right next to one that the bolts (that those skirts cover) had given way. What a mess. I just hope no cars were parked near it when it went down... or people... After the fact, I was wondering what would have happened if someone had decided that I might have had something to do with the fallen lamp? I had no tools, but it still would have been a big hassle. An example of how a LPC could bring undue scrutiny.

As far as Wal-Mart & other Big Box stores go, I bet if you were to ask the Home Office of any one of them, most would say no to geocaches being placed on their property. First, there'd be the issue of liability. Secondly, I'm sure they'd bring up the fact that somehow by letting geocachers set up on the property they'd be setting a precident that would mean they'd have to allow unions to set up activities on the property (I'm not kidding here. Even the Salvation Army had to jump through hoops to get kettle ringers in front of the stores.) After working for Wally World for ten years, some of that in managment, I just get the feeling that that would be the answer. Heck, I doubt they'd give you a reason at all. Just "NO!" So, if I'm right, all these caches are placed against geocaching guidelines.

I'm not against LPC's, but I am against breaking the rules. That's what caused the situation in the article linked by TheAlabamaRambler. Living in New Hampshire and everybody I work with knowing I'm a geocacher, I've been asked so many questions and had sooo many remarks made about being an outlaw. (The 1st news report out, the police sounded like they wanted to arrest all geocachers) So, don't think geocaching isn't going to be hurt by these hides. It will. That's what I don't like. If you've got permission, great! If you've asked your buddy the assistant manager over the pet department, that dosn't count. Get permission from the Store Manager. Just because everyone else is placing LPC's is not a precident for your placing one, too.

My summary: We don't need to ban LPCs. We need to ban caches that do not meet geocaching.com guidelines.

[+gh patriot]

I wanted to place a cache in a county park nearby and I went to get approval at the county parks office. They mailed me some forms that had so much legal crap on it that I just threw it out and placed caches elsewhere. Seriously, the form was something that only a lawyer could understand!!!! Im not a genius but im not stupid either and that form totally turned me off to even thinking about placing a cache in the county parks!!!

Edited February 9, 2007 by gh patriot

[+Renegade Knight]

WallMart corporate would roll out the red carpet for caches if they though there was money in it for them to make. Since there is, it's not an impossible scenario. I often end my cache day on a urban micro and then go buy some grub and a drink.

[+TMAACA]

I liken LPC's to those circus peanut candies, the first one is novel and interesting, the second is okay, but beyond that you cross over into too much of a good thing... Should they be banned?? Not in my opinion (there always seems to be a market for circus peanuts ). Do I want to do 100 of them?? No... but whether I do or not, is my choice.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I've been saying for ages that almost all retail parking lot LPC's are placed without permission, while the reviewers look the other way, even though permission is required for such hides. But nothing is going to happen, so put me down for what Coyote Red said. The prison parking lot cache referenced by the OP is almost unbelievable. It definately would have ended up on my ignore list. But I don't think ignore lists existed back then.

 

Interesting article

Yup. It doesn't have anything to do with this thread, but it's interesting.

Actually it has everything to do with this thread - it happened to be on an electrical box instead of a lamp-post, but everything else about the situation is directly relevant.

[vagabond]

I think Light Post caches should banned under the electrical equipment guideline. They have 120 or 220 volt electrical lines running through them, and people have been zapped by one with a bad ground and energized housing. And they weren't poking around them with a screwdriver.

 

Well I think the first cacher to get zapped would be the hider, and I doubt if he would hide it there after getting zapped

[+qanine]

I have just stumbled upon this thread on LPC caches, and I must say that I am extremely dismayed. The very idea of hiding a cache container inside a Liquid Propane Container (LPC) sounds, to me, to be EXTREMELY hazardous to the hider, to prospective finders and even to the entire neighborhood in which the liquid propane gas tank is located. It is ALWAYS extemely dangerous to open such a pressurized propane tank and it should never be done under any circumstances! Please, if you ever encounter an LPC cache, please avoid it at all costs, and please report it to the reviewer!

 

Also, it has come to my attention that there has been talk in this thread of "lifting skirts". Please, I urge you, keep this fourm family-friendly and God-friendly, and please stop making comments about lifting women's skirts. Such is gutter talk, the talk of heathens and hooligans; I know this to be true because my sainted Mother told me so when I was still quite small and my Mother was never wrong. Thank you.

 

LPC stands for "Long haired Poodle Cache" Which can be just as dangerous as the propane type. As for lifting skirts... nuff said

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Mr.Yuck]

WallMart corporate would roll out the red carpet for caches if they though there was money in it for them to make. Since there is, it's not an impossible scenario. I often end my cache day on a urban micro and then go buy some grub and a drink.

 

Whatever happened to Track in the box going to Wal-Mart corporate to "turn in" geocachers?

My opinion would be much closer to that of Too Tall John. But I'm too lazy to quote it. And I like to end my day by walking right past the LPC on my ignore list in favor of the adult beverage. But seriously, could you imagine people going up to the store manager of a big box store, be it Wal-Mart or Target, and asking if they could leave a film canister in the parking lot, and explaining geocaching? I'm guessing there would be about a 99% rejection rate, with liability being the major issue. But this isn't an issue at all, because we just all assume the hiders have permission (wink wink, nudge nudge).

[+Renegade Knight]

WallMart corporate would roll out the red carpet for caches if they though there was money in it for them to make. Since there is, it's not an impossible scenario. I often end my cache day on a urban micro and then go buy some grub and a drink.

 

Whatever happened to Track in the box going to Wal-Mart corporate to "turn in" geocachers? ...

 

He probably got the same reaction that you and Too Talll John think cachers would get. It's all in your approach. Some people have a better approach than others. Others know they don't have a great approach and use more discression. Most really don't seem to understand the concept.

[+ReadyOrNot]

I liken LPC's to those circus peanut candies, the first one is novel and interesting, the second is okay, but beyond that you cross over into too much of a good thing... Should they be banned?? Not in my opinion (there always seems to be a market for circus peanuts ). Do I want to do 100 of them?? No... but whether I do or not, is my choice.

 

No, I don't think they should be banned, but how about a 15 or 20 mile buffer rule. Kinda like the .1 mile rule for real caches The newbies would still be able to enjoy their first experience and be spared having to find another one within 20 miles.

[+sbell111]

I think Light Post caches should banned under the electrical equipment guideline. They have 120 or 220 volt electrical lines running through them, and people have been zapped by one with a bad ground and energized housing. And they weren't poking around them with a screwdriver.

Two thoughts:

1. What 'electrical equipment' guideline? I just skimmed the guidelines twice and did a word search of them and I can't find reference to 'electrical equipment'.
   
2. I've never found a LPC that required a screwdriver to find. Most simply require that the skirt be lifted. Some merely have the cache magnetized to the pole. I have not yet found a LPC that I would consider to be any danger, at all.
   

[+sbell111]

Interesting article

Yup. It doesn't have anything to do with this thread, but it's interesting.

I would disagree.

Lately, every thread has been about every topic, so I suppose that you are right. <sigh>

... It was at a Wal-Mart (see below more on Wally World), and it was the lamppost right next to one that the bolts (that those skirts cover) had given way. What a mess. I just hope no cars were parked near it when it went down... or people... After the fact, I was wondering what would have happened if someone had decided that I might have had something to do with the fallen lamp? I had no tools, but it still would have been a big hassle. An example of how a LPC could bring undue scrutiny.

I think that that is a heck of a stretch. The presence of a film can does not cause a lightpole to fall down. In fact, I haven't tried it out, but I bet that those bolts are torqued down pretty good. I doubt that you would be able to undo them with any tools that you might be carrying in your pocket.

As far as Wal-Mart & other Big Box stores go, I bet if you were to ask the Home Office of any one of them, most would say no to geocaches being placed on their property. First, there'd be the issue of liability. Secondly, I'm sure they'd bring up the fact that somehow by letting geocachers set up on the property they'd be setting a precident that would mean they'd have to allow unions to set up activities on the property (I'm not kidding here. Even the Salvation Army had to jump through hoops to get kettle ringers in front of the stores.) After working for Wally World for ten years, some of that in managment, I just get the feeling that that would be the answer. Heck, I doubt they'd give you a reason at all. Just "NO!" So, if I'm right, all these caches are placed against geocaching guidelines. ...

Do you really think that WalMart is unaware of Geocaching? Edited February 10, 2007 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

No, I don't think they should be banned, but how about a 15 or 20 mile buffer rule. Kinda like the .1 mile rule for real caches The newbies would still be able to enjoy their first experience and be spared having to find another one within 20 miles.

So basically, you're just trolling for angst, right?

[+Lakeshore Geocachers]

Ok, then it's settled. We must play by the rules. ALL OF THEM. No more caches without owner's permission. None. That should reduce the amount of them a bit...No more caches that are not maintained every 30 days, no more wet logs or McToy filled caches that you walked 2 hours to find. That will cull the numbers a bit too...

and no more ammo cans...or cammo tape covered plastic containers, or ones not clearly marked as Geocaches or have the official paper work in them...We should get back to basics and have to travel 50 miles and hike 5 more to find a geocache. The thing is that WE decide the rules...if ya don't want ta do it, don't! The only reason we place the ones we do is other cachers go out and find them!

Just our two cents worth.

[+KBI]

... My second LPC hunt included me digging out a screwdriver and opening up the access panel until I came to my senses.. DNF. ... Another case in point was my first LPC hunt at a state prison nonetheless. I proceded to bypass the lamp post and go straight for the sprinkler head. When it proved obvious that it WAS a sprinkler head I couldn't get the darn thing back together, so I promptly took my leave. I came home and discovered that 4 of the previous finders had been approached by security personnel in a not-so-nice manner.

 

The moral to the story: Think before you hide urban micros....

The moral to the story: Use common sense and good judgment while searching for geocaches, and consider doing better homework before the hunt.

 

If everyone in this hobby were in the habit of using such judgment, and, more importantly, willing to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

 

Sure, it's nice when the cache owner places his cache with consideration toward helping seekers avoid such problems, but it would never occur to me to blame someone else for my own bad decisions if I were to cause trouble during a cache hunt.

 

It says as much in the standard disclaimer that links from the top of each and every cache page: "Always exercise common sense and caution" and "Cache seekers assume all risks involved in seeking a cache."

 

 

The real moral of the story is that we should all use our heads when looking for a cache and not do damage to the area. This is true whether you are looking for a cache in the woods or in the asphalt jungle.

This is also true no matter WHAT you're doing -- geocaching or not.

 

Let’s say you’ve just arrived at a friend’s house for a visit. You don’t know for certain whether he’s at home at the moment. You’re not even entirely sure you’re at the right house – he just moved to this part of town last week. You’ve never been here before.

 

As with cache hunting, you start with the most common and obvious (and least damaging and disruptive) ‘find tactic’ in order to determine whether he’s at home. If that doesn’t produce a ‘find,’ you then work your way up to the most damaging/disruptive method with which you’re comfortable until you either get the desired result or you run out of options (or patience).

 

Do you call his home # from your cell phone? Let’s say this option is no good – he doesn’t have a phone installed yet, and he has no cell phone (and cache containers don't answer phones anyway -- this is an analogy ).

• Do you knock lightly on the door? Certainly.
  
• Do you ring the doorbell? Depending on the time of day ... sure, why not.
  
• Do you POUND on the door? Well, maybe, depending on certain factors. Judgment call.
  
• Do you knock on the BACK door? Again, that’s a big maybe. This option also comes with its own set of potential problems. Another judgment call.
  
• Do you stand out front and scream as loud as you can, or reach into your car and lay on the horn? More potential for trouble, and yet another common-sense decision required.
  
• Do you throw rocks at the front window? Not sure. Now we’re talking damage potential.
  
• Do you break in? Depends – just how badly to you need to see this guy (how bad do you need this find)? Is it an emergency? If so, do you look for a hidden key? Smash a window? Kick in the door?
  

What if it turns out that he was unexpectedly away at the moment (like a temporarily disabled cache) – and you could have simply left and come back later? What if it turns out to be the wrong house (like fat-fingered coords) – because you transposed a number in the address?

 

If your friend arrives from an errand a few moments later to see you standing next to his smashed-in front window – or worse, next to his neighbor’s smashed-in front window – are you going to apologize, or are you going to somehow try to blame your friend, the homeowner, for the damage?

 

Each cache seeker is faced with a very similar and very long list of find tactics to choose from when hunting a cache. Which tactics the seeker chooses to use is purely a matter of personal responsibility – a term which, unfortunately, seems to make a lot of people uncomfortable in our present culture of not-my-fault victimhood.

 

There. That's my annoying little rant for the day. Now I feel all better.

Edited February 10, 2007 by KBI

[+Team GeoBlast]

I'm not seeing a whole lot of detriment here.

 

Call me a cynic, but I don't see it happening without a massive outside force coming down hard on Groundspeak or the general community.

 

What massive outside force would weld such power? I've checked with the Red Army and they didn't show the interest I was hoping for. The truth is there is only one group of people that possesses the power to make wholesale changes like this. That would be the Geocachers themselves.

 

As long as there's people that want to find LPCs and PLCs and those caches continue to collect massive amounts of log entires, this is not going to happen in the current GC.com culture. This is about having the will to have a real defintion for a "cache quality" and then finding a way to enforce it. GC.com has never shown any interest in either.

 

If GC.com doesn't address this, it leaves the door wide open for someone to come along and do this better. Once that is done and done well, all the LPC and PLC hide and seekers will be known as Geocachers and a good portion of the other players will be doing something else. As for the balance that remain, well, they will probably be sitting here in this forum spewing the same old angst. Then the new question would be, "where does your -real- interest lie? In the act of Geocaching or griping about Geocaching"

 

I don't mean to insult anyone when I say this but when I consider Geocaching without the people that prefer to hide and seek caches that were placed with thought and ingenuity, I see a different game, a game void of a heart and soul.

[+Team GeoBlast]

... My second LPC hunt included me digging out a screwdriver and opening up the access panel until I came to my senses.. DNF. ... Another case in point was my first LPC hunt at a state prison nonetheless. I proceded to bypass the lamp post and go straight for the sprinkler head. When it proved obvious that it WAS a sprinkler head I couldn't get the darn thing back together, so I promptly took my leave. I came home and discovered that 4 of the previous finders had been approached by security personnel in a not-so-nice manner.

 

The moral to the story: Think before you hide urban micros....

The moral to the story: Use common sense and good judgment while searching for geocaches, and consider doing better homework before the hunt.

 

If everyone in this hobby were in the habit of using such judgment, and, more importantly, willing to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

 

Sure, it's nice when the cache owner places his cache with consideration toward helping seekers avoid such problems, but it would never occur to me to blame someone else for my own bad decisions if I were to cause trouble during a cache hunt.

 

It says as much in the standard disclaimer that links from the top of each and every cache page: "Always exercise common sense and caution" and "Cache seekers assume all risks involved in seeking a cache."

 

 

The real moral of the story is that we should all use our heads when looking for a cache and not do damage to the area. This is true whether you are looking for a cache in the woods or in the asphalt jungle.

This is also true no matter WHAT you're doing -- geocaching or not.

 

Let’s say you’ve just arrived at a friend’s house for a visit. You don’t know for certain whether he’s at home at the moment. You’re not even entirely sure you’re at the right house – he just moved to this part of town last week. You’ve never been here before.

 

As with cache hunting, you start with the most common and obvious (and least damaging and disruptive) ‘find tactic’ in order to determine whether he’s at home. If that doesn’t produce a ‘find,’ you then work your way up to the most damaging/disruptive method with which you’re comfortable until you either get the desired result or you run out of options (or patience).

 

Do you call his home # from your cell phone? Let’s say this option is no good – he doesn’t have a phone installed yet, and he has no cell phone (and cache containers don't answer phones anyway -- this is an analogy ).

• Do you knock lightly on the door? Certainly.
  
• Do you ring the doorbell? Depending on the time of day ... sure, why not.
  
• Do you POUND on the door? Well, maybe, depending on certain factors. Judgment call.
  
• Do you knock on the BACK door? Again, that’s a big maybe. This option also comes with its own set of potential problems. Another judgment call.
  
• Do you stand out front and scream as loud as you can, or reach into your car and lay on the horn? More potential for trouble, and yet another common-sense decision required.
  
• Do you throw rocks at the front window? Not sure. Now we’re talking damage potential.
  
• Do you break in? Depends – just how badly to you need to see this guy (how bad do you need this find)? Is it an emergency? If so, do you look for a hidden key? Smash a window? Kick in the door?
  

What if it turns out that he was unexpectedly away at the moment (like a temporarily disabled cache) – and you could have simply left and come back later? What if it turns out to be the wrong house (like fat-fingered coords) – because you transposed a number in the address?

 

If your friend arrives from an errand a few moments later to see you standing next to his smashed-in front window – or worse, next to his neighbor’s smashed-in front window – are you going to apologize, or are you going to somehow try to blame your friend, the homeowner, for the damage?

 

Each cache seeker is faced with a very similar and very long list of find tactics to choose from when hunting a cache. Which tactics the seeker chooses to use is purely a matter of personal responsibility – a term which, unfortunately, seems to make a lot of people uncomfortable in our present culture of not-my-fault victimhood.

 

There. That's my annoying little rant for the day. Now I feel all better.

 

This is a very good post, thanks. I'm headed into my lab right now to figure out a cache hide that will punish those who choose go past knockly loudly. I'm serious about this.

[+KBI]

I'm not seeing a whole lot of detriment here.

Call me a cynic, but I don't see it happening without a massive outside force coming down hard on Groundspeak or the general community.

... This is about having the will to have a real defintion for a "cache quality" and then finding a way to enforce it. GC.com has never shown any interest in either.

Is this the new thread for complaining about so-called 'lame' caches? I thought we were talking about owner vs. finder when placing blame for damage incurred during a cache hunt.

 

Then the new question would be, "where does your -real- interest lie? In the act of Geocaching or griping about Geocaching"

That's the question right now. You can easily avoid the caches you prefer not to hunt -- why whine about them here?

 

I don't mean to insult anyone when I say this but when I consider Geocaching without the people that prefer to hide and seek caches that were placed with thought and ingenuity, I see a different game, a game void of a heart and soul.

Translation: I wish everyone would play the game the way I prefer to play. Those who enjoy themselves when hiding and finding caches I don't like are WRONG.

 

If that's not what you meant, please correct me.

[+KBI]

This is a very good post, thanks.

Thanks for the kind words.

 

I'm headed into my lab right now to figure out a cache hide that will punish those who choose go past knockly loudly. I'm serious about this.

"Lab?!?" Oooohhh, sounds like a good one!!

[+Too Tall John]

Lately, every thread has been about every topic, so I suppose that you are right. <sigh>

No, I'm right because it speaks to the question.

... It was at a Wal-Mart (see below more on Wally World), and it was the lamppost right next to one that the bolts (that those skirts cover) had given way. What a mess. I just hope no cars were parked near it when it went down... or people... After the fact, I was wondering what would have happened if someone had decided that I might have had something to do with the fallen lamp? I had no tools, but it still would have been a big hassle. An example of how a LPC could bring undue scrutiny.

I think that that is a heck of a stretch. The presence of a film can does not cause a lightpole to fall down. In fact, I haven't tried it out, but I bet that those bolts are torqued down pretty good. I doubt that you would be able to undo them with any tools that you might be carrying in your pocket.

I know that, and you know that, but the store manager (or worse, the shlep who got sent out to clean up all the broken glass) is all steamed up about the mess they are surveying. They look across the lot and see a truck pulled up next to another lightpost and some dude's fiddling with the base. What do you think they'll do?

As far as Wal-Mart & other Big Box stores go, I bet if you were to ask the Home Office of any one of them, most would say no to geocaches being placed on their property. First, there'd be the issue of liability. Secondly, I'm sure they'd bring up the fact that somehow by letting geocachers set up on the property they'd be setting a precedent that would mean they'd have to allow unions to set up activities on the property (I'm not kidding here. Even the Salvation Army had to jump through hoops to get kettle ringers in front of the stores.) After working for Wally World for ten years, some of that in management, I just get the feeling that that would be the answer. Heck, I doubt they'd give you a reason at all. Just "NO!" So, if I'm right, all these caches are placed against geocaching guidelines. ...

Do you really think that WalMart is unaware of Geocaching?

No, but I bet they don't like it in their parking lots. What are they going to do? Start a new ad campaign? I can see it now, the little smiley guy swooping around smashing caches. NOT the image Wal-Mart wants to project. They also don't have ads where the little smiley guy is attacking shoplifters, but you better believe they don't like them either. (Actually, I would like to see this ad. Maybe with the smiley dressed as Zorro again?) <- Zorro's a Ninja?

My overall point still remains. A lot of parking lot LPCs do not have explicit permission to be placed, thus are breaking geocaching rules, and frankly, THE LAW. If we can get Wal-Mart to say "Yes" to geocaches at a corporate level, then great, I'll be out tomorrow. I personally doubt that is going to happen.

[+Too Tall John]

This is a very good post, thanks. I'm headed into my lab right now to figure out a cache hide that will punish those who choose go past knockly loudly. I'm serious about this.

Ditto on the kudos to KBI.

Now you've got me thinking... I'm picturing a cache armed with a rat trap, a car alarm, and a spray bottle of indelible dye... Call it "Knock Softly and Carry a Big 1st Aid Kit."

Oh... yeah... there are guidelines about cacher safety, aren't there... well, scratch the rat trap...

[+Loch Cache]

The real moral of the story is that we should all use our heads when looking for a cache and not do damage to the area. This is true whether you are looking for a cache in the woods or in the asphalt jungle.

 

If you can not hide a cache without damaging the area then you shouldn't hide a cache there. If you think the average cacher can't find the cache without damaging the area then don't hide it there.

 

LPCs can also be more than lame micros.

Here is one of mine that has gotten good comments:

Regular sized skirt lifter

 

The post in the middle has a skirt and you can fit a regular sized cache underneath:

 

So, if you make a blanket rule you lose some good ones.

 

Loch Cache

[+sbell111]

I'm headed into my lab right now to figure out a cache hide that will punish those who choose go past knockly loudly. I'm serious about this.

"Lab?!?" Oooohhh, sounds like a good one!!

Someone tried to give my wife a lab this morning, but I'm not ready for a new puppy. BTW, I don't want to find anything thats been inside a lab. Yuck.

[+Team GeoBlast]

I'm not seeing a whole lot of detriment here.

Call me a cynic, but I don't see it happening without a massive outside force coming down hard on Groundspeak or the general community.

... This is about having the will to have a real defintion for a "cache quality" and then finding a way to enforce it. GC.com has never shown any interest in either.

Is this the new thread for complaining about so-called 'lame' caches? I thought we were talking about owner vs. finder when placing blame for damage incurred during a cache hunt.

 

Then the new question would be, "where does your -real- interest lie? In the act of Geocaching or griping about Geocaching"

That's the question right now. You can easily avoid the caches you prefer not to hunt -- why whine about them here?

 

I don't mean to insult anyone when I say this but when I consider Geocaching without the people that prefer to hide and seek caches that were placed with thought and ingenuity, I see a different game, a game void of a heart and soul.

Translation: I wish everyone would play the game the way I prefer to play. Those who enjoy themselves when hiding and finding caches I don't like are WRONG.

 

If that's not what you meant, please correct me.

 

Don't mind if I do.

 

Somehow, I don't think I'm not the first one to bring this up. In fact, if you'd step off the "anyone how chooses to broach the subject of "quality control" of a geocache is a whiner" soapbox for a moment and observe and listen, you might notice that there's several people around these parts that love Geocaching but don't like the way it is going. It's not WRONG to feel this way and this happened to be where I sit on the fence today. People like me see a definable and widening distance between PLCs, LPCs and the other end of "their percieved other end" of the spectrum of caches.

 

Speaking only for myself, I've pondered the history and evolution of GC.om on a few occasions. At different points in time, they have in fact addressed cache quality. For example, at some point, they decided that it was not cool to bury a cache. Then, they huddled up and said maybe hiding one around bridges wasn't such a good idea. The list goes on and then at some point, they stopped. When they stopped the number of caches soared and so did find counts and the amount of players.

 

Again, this my own opinion, so please don't classify it as WRONG unless you can prove otherwise. There's a reason that GC.com chooses not to address this. It's the color green. They've got a booming trackable/collectable market that would be severely hurt if they took issue with every illegal LPC and PLC hide. This is the reason the quality control stopped not because these are good for the game and people like them. Quality control is an investment that they choose not to make in the interest of numbers.

[+sbell111]

No, but I bet they don't like it in their parking lots. What are they going to do? Start a new ad campaign? ...

If Wal-Mart wanted to get rid of caches at their stores they could do it with a simple phone call to Groudspeak. Caches would be archived faster than you can say 'Mickey Mouse'.

 

I suspect, however, that they are quite pleased with caches on their properties. Geocachers come to their parking lots and are likely to stop in and buy something if they are in need. The fact that they haven't had to officially approve or disapprove of them allows them to have plausible deniability if there is ever an issue. It's win/win for them.

Edited February 10, 2007 by sbell111

[+KBI]

I'm headed into my lab right now to figure out a cache hide that will punish those who choose go past knockly loudly. I'm serious about this.

Now you've got me thinking... I'm picturing a cache armed with a rat trap, a car alarm, and a spray bottle of indelible dye... Call it "Knock Softly and Carry a Big 1st Aid Kit." Oh... yeah... there are guidelines about cacher safety, aren't there... well, scratch the rat trap...

Just a suggestion, but you guys might want to think twice about setting out intentional booby traps that might hurt someone. A cache like that goes beyond the stuff that's been discussed here so far.

[+sbell111]

What the heck is a PLC? I keep going with 'Personal Line of Credit', but it doesn't work in this context.

[+Team GeoBlast]

What the heck is a PLC? I keep going with 'Personal Line of Credit', but it doesn't work in this context.

 

Parking Lot Cache.

[+KBI]

What the heck is a PLC? I keep going with 'Personal Line of Credit', but it doesn't work in this context.

My guess is Parking Lot Cache, but it could just as well mean Probably Lame Cache the way it's used.

 

Overuse of undefined TLAs can be confusing.

[+KBI]

If that's not what you meant, please correct me.

Don't mind if I do.

 

Somehow, I don't think I'm not the first one to bring this up. In fact, if you'd step off the "anyone how chooses to broach the subject of "quality control" of a geocache is a whiner" soapbox for a moment and observe and listen, you might notice that there's several people around these parts that love Geocaching but don't like the way it is going. It's not WRONG to feel this way ...

No, it's not wrong to feel that way. You have a right to your opinion.

 

Whether you choose to whine about it like the others, or to accept it and simply step around caches you dislike as the rest of us do, is a whole 'nother choice.

 

... Again, this my own opinion, so please don't classify it as WRONG unless you can prove otherwise.

I didn't say your opinion was wrong. What I said is that you seem to think that others are wrong for enjoying a particular type of geocaching that you don't happen to care for. Where I have a problem is when you go beyond your opinion and call for the game to be forcibly CHANGED just to suit your personal taste.

[+sillygirl & jrr]

This is a very good post, thanks. I'm headed into my lab right now to figure out a cache hide that will punish those who choose go past knockly loudly. I'm serious about this.

Ditto on the kudos to KBI.

Now you've got me thinking... I'm picturing a cache armed with a rat trap, a car alarm, and a spray bottle of indelible dye... Call it "Knock Softly and Carry a Big 1st Aid Kit."

Oh... yeah... there are guidelines about cacher safety, aren't there... well, scratch the rat trap...

 

So I you've been to TGB's lab, have you? Actually I'm sure you haven't as then he would have to...you know what. I haven't been to the lab either, but I've seen the results, and if anyone could construct such a cache it is TGB. And just FYI one of his current hides IS a rat trap of sorts... (Don't worry no injuries have been reported!)

 

On topic, I actually opened this thread as at first I had NO idea what an LPC cache was (or why they should be banned). Now that I've read this topic I'm happy to say we've only ever found 1 (and it is now archived). Rumor has it there is one other on the island but it is a puzzle cache we haven't found yet (but cache page specifically says no tools are required.

jrr

Edited February 10, 2007 by sillygirl & jrr

[+Team GeoBlast]

If that's not what you meant, please correct me.

Don't mind if I do.

 

Somehow, I don't think I'm not the first one to bring this up. In fact, if you'd step off the "anyone how chooses to broach the subject of "quality control" of a geocache is a whiner" soapbox for a moment and observe and listen, you might notice that there's several people around these parts that love Geocaching but don't like the way it is going. It's not WRONG to feel this way ...

No, it's not wrong to feel that way. You have a right to your opinion.

 

Whether you choose to whine about it like the others, or to accept it and simply step around caches you dislike as the rest of us do, is a whole 'nother choice.

 

... Again, this my own opinion, so please don't classify it as WRONG unless you can prove otherwise.

I didn't say your opinion was wrong. What I said is that you seem to think that others are wrong for enjoying a particular type of geocaching that you don't happen to care for. Where I have a problem is when you go beyond your opinion and call for the game to be forcibly CHANGED just to suit your personal taste.

 

Sorry if I misinterepted your post but refering to it as whining, make it feel WRONG to bring it up.

 

Yes, some choose to work their way around caches like this (as I do) but I've been a big picture person. As many great men and women have pointed out before me, the game IS changing and PLCs and LPC are playing a role it in. Good, bad, or indifferent that is for GC.com to decide.

[+Team GeoBlast]

This is a very good post, thanks. I'm headed into my lab right now to figure out a cache hide that will punish those who choose go past knockly loudly. I'm serious about this.

Ditto on the kudos to KBI.

Now you've got me thinking... I'm picturing a cache armed with a rat trap, a car alarm, and a spray bottle of indelible dye... Call it "Knock Softly and Carry a Big 1st Aid Kit."

Oh... yeah... there are guidelines about cacher safety, aren't there... well, scratch the rat trap...

 

So I you've been to TGB's lab, have you? Actually I'm sure you haven't as then he would have to...you know what. I haven't been to the lab either, but I've seen the results, and if anyone could construct such a cache it is TGB. And just FYI one of his current hides IS a rat trap of sorts... (Don't worry no injuries have been reported!)

 

On topic, I actually opened this thread as at first I had NO idea what an LPC cache was (or why they should be banned). Now that I've read this topic I'm happy to say we've only ever found 1 (and it is now archived). Rumor has it there is one other on the island but it is a puzzle cache we haven't found yet (but cache page specifically says no tools are required.

jrr

 

LOL.. I'll tell ya what Jrr. I'll let you look in my lab if you'll let me listen to your pipeline.

[+Team GeoBlast]

I'm headed into my lab right now to figure out a cache hide that will punish those who choose go past knockly loudly. I'm serious about this.

Now you've got me thinking... I'm picturing a cache armed with a rat trap, a car alarm, and a spray bottle of indelible dye... Call it "Knock Softly and Carry a Big 1st Aid Kit." Oh... yeah... there are guidelines about cacher safety, aren't there... well, scratch the rat trap...

Just a suggestion, but you guys might want to think twice about setting out intentional booby traps that might hurt someone. A cache like that goes beyond the stuff that's been discussed here so far.

 

sigh...

 

I've got a GREAT idea KBI. Let's both get off our okoles (Hawaiian for what you are sitting on) get into our cars, drive past Wally World, and find ourselves a great cache! Instead of a McToy.. let's put something REALLY cool in there. While we are there let's change out every zip lock and clean the container out. Just for good measure, let's hide it back better than we found it and pick up all the trash on the way back.

 

After we do all that, let's both do a lil cache dance and shake the earth.

 

Deal?

 

TGB out.

[+Too Tall John]

I'm headed into my lab right now to figure out a cache hide that will punish those who choose go past knockly loudly. I'm serious about this.

Now you've got me thinking... I'm picturing a cache armed with a rat trap, a car alarm, and a spray bottle of indelible dye... Call it "Knock Softly and Carry a Big 1st Aid Kit." Oh... yeah... there are guidelines about cacher safety, aren't there... well, scratch the rat trap...

Just a suggestion, but you guys might want to think twice about setting out intentional booby traps that might hurt someone. A cache like that goes beyond the stuff that's been discussed here so far.

I'd propose that some of the puzzle caches I've seen are more of a threat to (mental) health than this would be. Besides, can't you see the logs now? Took: Nothing. Left: Finger.

But seriously, it didn't come out exactly the way I wanted, but what I said speaks to guidelines, and when or when not to follow them.

If the guidelines say not to place dangerous caches, when is it ok to place a dangerous cache?

If the guidelines say not to put beer in a cache, when is it ok to leave Sam Adams in the cache?

If the guidelines say not to place caches on private property without permission, when is it ok to do so?

Oh... If someone wants to leave Sam Adams in a cache, since that would be wrong, we can make arrangements for you to drop it off with me. I'll leave my big red insulated "cache" on the front porch. It's the one marked "Igloo."

[+KBI]

Sorry if I misinterepted your post but refering to it as whining, make it feel WRONG to bring it up.

I've read that three times, but I just can't figure out what you're trying to say there. Guess I need some coffee.

 

Yes, some choose to work their way around caches like this (as I do) but I've been a big picture person. As many great men and women have pointed out before me, the game IS changing and PLCs and LPC are playing a role it in. Good, bad, or indifferent that is for GC.com to decide.

... and their customers.

 

Yes, the game is changing. It's been changing steadily ever since the very first cache was placed, and will likely continue to change. Your point?

 

Let's be clear: Are you calling for some kind of cache quality enforcement to be imposed accross the board, or aren't you?

 

You said:

The truth is there is only one group of people that possesses the power to make wholesale changes like this. That would be the Geocachers themselves.

 

As long as there's people that want to find LPCs and PLCs and those caches continue to collect massive amounts of log entires, this is not going to happen in the current GC.com culture. This is about having the will to have a real defintion for a "cache quality" and then finding a way to enforce it.

That sounds pretty clear to me. You're not satisfied with the fact that you have the power to pick and choose the caching experiences you prefer. You clearly want to impose your preference on everybody.

 

Why?

 

 

I've got a GREAT idea KBI. Let's both get off our okoles (Hawaiian for what you are sitting on) get into our cars, drive past Wally World, and find ourselves a great cache! Instead of a McToy.. let's put something REALLY cool in there. While we are there let's change out every zip lock and clean the container out. Just for good measure, let's hide it back better than we found it and pick up all the trash on the way back.

 

After we do all that, let's both do a lil cache dance and shake the earth.

 

Deal?

Deal. Today, that sounds great.

 

Sometimes that’s exactly what I prefer to do. Sounds good! I’ll bring the snacks.

 

Other times, however, I’m very happy with a simple drive-by that I can enjoy as part of an otherwise mundane round of errands on a busy day.

 

And then there are those frequent times when I find myself in a hotel with no rental car and several hours to kill, and I’m EXTREMELY grateful to have ANY geocache within walking distance of the place where I would have instead been lying around on my okole, in my underwear, watching reruns.

 

So you don’t like finding caches in lamp posts or in parking lots. Fine. There are LOTS of us, however, who sometimes ENJOY those very caches you DESPISE. Why must you try to change the game to fit your arbitrary taste? Why begrudge us our fun? Those caches are so easy to avoid -- why not just avoid them?

 

Whatever happened to ‘live and let live?’

[GermanSailor]

Considering the fact that the quote is often attributed to Dietrich Bonhoeffer, your response is awfully rude.

[...]

Either way, perhps you might consider lightening up.

 

I don't lighten up if someone plays down the what happened those times. You probably never spoke to someone in person, who survived "it".

 

I just because the quote is often attributed to the wrong person doesn't make it right. How difficult is it check something before quoting? I just can't stand people who abuse the names of such great people to have a polemic argument in a stupid internet discussion. I especially get excited if they obviously don't have the faintest idea what they are talking about.

 

Education is not a bad thing, and it is so easy to read up about everything on the internet.

 

GermanSailor

[GermanSailor]

One could certainly argue that it is perfectly on point.

 

Are you aware that thousends of people were killed and you find that quote a good comparison to LPCs?

 

GermanSailor

[+sbell111]

I don't lighten up if someone plays down the what happened those times. You probably never spoke to someone in person, who survived "it". ...

Now who doesn't know what they're talking about?

 

I never met my maternal grandfather because he died on D-Day. My father-in-law served in Europe and was fortunate to make it back home in one piece.

[+sbell111]

One could certainly argue that it is perfectly on point.

Are you aware that thousends of people were killed and you find that quote a good comparison to LPCs?

Of course, I am aware. That does not change the fact that it is a good bit of verbiage.

[Clan Riffster]

I don't mean to insult anyone when I say this but when I consider Geocaching without the people that prefer to hide and seek caches that were placed with thought and ingenuity, I see a different game, a game void of a heart and soul.

Careful. Even the slightest hint that folks should apply a bit of brain power to their hides will be shouted down by the Staunch Defenders Of Everything Lame.

 

LPCs can also be more than lame micros.

Here is one of mine that has gotten good comments:

The post in the middle has a skirt and you can fit a regular sized cache underneath:

So, if you make a blanket rule you lose some good ones.

If Groundspeak created a rule requiring explicit permission for commercial parking lot hides, would it affect this cache?

 

Somehow, I don't think I'm not the first one to bring this up. In fact, if you'd step off the "anyone how chooses to broach the subject of "quality control" of a geocache is a whiner" soapbox for a moment and observe and listen, you might notice that there's several people around these parts that love Geocaching but don't like the way it is going.

Thank you!

[Mr.Yuck]

I don't mean to insult anyone when I say this but when I consider Geocaching without the people that prefer to hide and seek caches that were placed with thought and ingenuity, I see a different game, a game void of a heart and soul.

Careful. Even the slightest hint that folks should apply a bit of brain power to their hides will be shouted down by the Staunch Defenders Of Everything Lame.

 

LPCs can also be more than lame micros.

Here is one of mine that has gotten good comments:

The post in the middle has a skirt and you can fit a regular sized cache underneath:

So, if you make a blanket rule you lose some good ones.

If Groundspeak created a rule requiring explicit permission for commercial parking lot hides, would it affect this cache?

 

No, it would not affect that cache (which looks excellent, by the way). However, I must correct Clan Riffster; there is no rule to be created, that rule already exists. Commercial parking lot hides are approved under a "look the other way, and assume permission" policy. Should this rule be enforced? Well, I always say, if it can happen to cemetery caches (which it did), it can happen to PLC's.

[+KBI]

I don't mean to insult anyone when I say this but when I consider Geocaching without the people that prefer to hide and seek caches that were placed with thought and ingenuity, I see a different game, a game void of a heart and soul.

Careful. Even the slightest hint that folks should apply a bit of brain power to their hides will be shouted down by the Staunch Defenders Of Everything Lame.

Really? Like who?

[Clan Riffster]

I must correct Clan Riffster; there is no rule to be created, that rule already exists.

Very true. I guess what I meant was, could/should Groundspeak strengthen their approval process, advising their reviewers to require "explicit" permission from hiders who want to place caches in commercial parking lots. As it stands, hiding in a P/Lot is pretty much OK, under the guise that the particular business built that parking lot for the public to utilize, without posting any specific rules governing such use. Obviously, the business's investment was intended for folks who are actually spending $$$ at their business, but without regulations prohibiting geocaching in these spots, under the English Standard of Law, geocaching is legal there. Since it is legal for me to hide a cache in a Wally World parking lot, Groundspeak will publish one if I submit it, typically without requiring me to show explicit permission.

 

I'd like for that to change, and I see such change as beneficial to the overall game. I have one commercial P/Lot hide, and the management was more than happy to grant me explicit permission for it, even though I could've probably got it published without jumping through those hoops. I see it as the right thing to do.

 

Really? Like who?

To steal a line from Larry the Cable Guy, "That there's funny, I don't care who you are"

[+KBI]

Careful. Even the slightest hint that folks should apply a bit of brain power to their hides will be shouted down by the Staunch Defenders Of Everything Lame.

Really? Like who?

To steal a line from Larry the Cable Guy, "That there's funny, I don't care who you are"

 

Why is that funny?

 

Does that mean you can't name anybody who "shouts down those who give even the slightest hint that folks should apply a bit of brain power to their hides?"

[+KBI]

I guess what I meant was, could/should Groundspeak strengthen their approval process, advising their reviewers to require "explicit" permission from hiders who want to place caches in commercial parking lots. ...

 

... I'd like for that to change, and I see such change as beneficial to the overall game. ... I see it as the right thing to do.

Just curious:

 

Not only have you consistently and loudly expressed a substantial dislike for the experience of finding "uninspired" (lame) micros in parking lots; the mere existence of such hides, when you're NOT finding them, seems to cause you discomfort as well.

 

Are you now suggesting that you would be happy to tolerate those types of caches if only the owners of such hides could provide indisputable and explicit proof of permission?

[+Team GeoBlast]

Sorry if I misinterepted your post but refering to it as whining, make it feel WRONG to bring it up.

I've read that three times, but I just can't figure out what you're trying to say there. Guess I need some coffee.

Remember saying something about whining and quoting me? You must not be very good at puzzles caches that was a 1/1.

 

Yes, some choose to work their way around caches like this (as I do) but I've been a big picture person. As many great men and women have pointed out before me, the game IS changing and PLCs and LPC are playing a role it in. Good, bad, or indifferent that is for GC.com to decide.

... and their customers.

 

Yes, the game is changing. It's been changing steadily ever since the very first cache was placed, and will likely continue to change. Your point?

 

No, I don't like the current path of change. I'm more of a "let's think hard about where this going to put us in five years" type of person. At the current rate of growth there's going to come a time where all dense urban areas are going to have a geocache hidden every five hundred feet. If you think this is acceptable then I suppose we've reached a point where we can agree to disagree.

 

Let's be clear: Are you calling for some kind of cache quality enforcement to be imposed accross the board, or aren't you?

 

I would propose that enforcing the ones in place would be a good start. Be clear: Where do you stand on this issue KBI?

 

If that doesn't work, then yes perhaps stricter guidelines or more specific rules should be considered at. One thing place I would start is to reconsider whether "the one size fits all guidelines" for geocaches works. I don't think the LPC and the ammo box in the woods are the same animal.

 

You said:

The truth is there is only one group of people that possesses the power to make wholesale changes like this. That would be the Geocachers themselves.

 

As long as there's people that want to find LPCs and PLCs and those caches continue to collect massive amounts of log entires, this is not going to happen in the current GC.com culture. This is about having the will to have a real defintion for a "cache quality" and then finding a way to enforce it.

 

That sounds pretty clear to me. You're not satisfied with the fact that you have the power to pick and choose the caching experiences you prefer. You clearly want to impose your preference on everybody.

 

Why?

 

We are speaking on two different levels.

 

I think you are focusing alot on yourself and are concerned that someone is going impose rules that take away the micro caches you want to hunt. You are basically having a discussion on micro level, no pun intended. On the other hand, I am speaking about a global direction of geocaching on a macro level. Like Jrr said, we don't even have any LPCs in Hawaii. We have some ingenious micros that I love hunting.

 

In sum I see GC.com as a good thing that's in need of a good tweak. You see it as something that is fine the way it is. Some of this status quo you enjoy is only possible because GC.com has evolved into a pretty nice little cache (pun intended) cow is blantantly ignoring the rules that are currently in place. Am I correct in assuming that this is okay with you?

 

 

 

I've got a GREAT idea KBI. Let's both get off our okoles (Hawaiian for what you are sitting on) get into our cars, drive past Wally World, and find ourselves a great cache! Instead of a McToy.. let's put something REALLY cool in there. While we are there let's change out every zip lock and clean the container out. Just for good measure, let's hide it back better than we found it and pick up all the trash on the way back.

 

After we do all that, let's both do a lil cache dance and shake the earth.

 

Deal?

Deal. Today, that sounds great.

 

Sometimes that’s exactly what I prefer to do. Sounds good! I’ll bring the snacks.

 

Other times, however, I’m very happy with a simple drive-by that I can enjoy as part of an otherwise mundane round of errands on a busy day.

 

And then there are those frequent times when I find myself in a hotel with no rental car and several hours to kill, and I’m EXTREMELY grateful to have ANY geocache within walking distance of the place where I would have instead been lying around on my okole, in my underwear, watching reruns.

 

So you don’t like finding caches in lamp posts or in parking lots. Fine. There are LOTS of us, however, who sometimes ENJOY those very caches you DESPISE. Why must you try to change the game to fit your arbitrary taste? Why begrudge us our fun? Those caches are so easy to avoid -- why not just avoid them?

 

Whatever happened to ‘live and let live?’

 

You are confusing me with someone else, I do not DESPISE micros. I said that GC.com should take a good hard look at what is happening and follow the rules they have in place now. Why do you insist on taking what I say and twisting it around like that?

[+Gossamyrrh]

[quote}

Which parking lots, exactly, do you want this to apply to?

 

I'd just be happy to have "parking lot" in the cache's description, so I can filter them out of my queries.

 

Conversely...if I place a lousy cache, I'd expect honest feedback. (easier said than done)

[Clan Riffster]

Why is that funny?

Oh, the irony....

[+sbell111]

You are confusing me with someone else, I do not DESPISE micros. I said that GC.com should take a good hard look at what is happening and follow the rules they have in place now. Why do you insist on taking what I say and twisting it around like that?

I'd be more likely to take your post seriously if you were singing from the same song over in the highway bridge thread. Since you have not made a similar post over there, I strongly suspect that you just have an axe to grind.