OK Old schoolers

[+LivesWithMonkeys]

Evidentally some people like geocaching near garbage dumpsters. Now who would have been visiting those places prior to geocaching.....

Before I started geocaching I was a homeless bum who would dig through dumpsters to find cans and bottles to take to the recycling center. Now I can look for a cache to find when I go dumpster diving

I was thinking of making an educational multicache, leading people around to various dumpsters and alleys where bums sleep in their own puddles of urine. That way, I can educate my children and others what might happen to them if they dont pay more attention to their studies.

[+Renegade Knight]

... Evidentally some people like geocaching near garbage dumpsters. Now who would have been visiting those places prior to geocaching.....

 

Caches have taken me to places that I find interesting that I would have never heard about or otherwise been to. If the occasional dumpster is the price of admission, it's easy enough to pay. Diving is optional.

 

The more work people spend on defining an aesthic cache (meaning one enjoyed by all) the less viable caches there are and the less of the ones that I'd like to find that will be placed.

 

The thing about creativity is that like everthing else you can fit it to a bell curve. Some great stuff, some bad stuff. But chop off the low end of the curve and you will harm the high end.

[+TrailGators]

Evidentally some people like geocaching near garbage dumpsters. Now who would have been visiting those places prior to geocaching.....

Before I started geocaching I was a homeless bum who would dig through dumpsters to find cans and bottles to take to the recycling center. Now I can look for a cache to find when I go dumpster diving

I was thinking of making an educational multicache, leading people around to various dumpsters and alleys where bums sleep in their own puddles of urine. That way, I can educate my children and others what might happen to them if they don't pay more attention to their studies.

Also when you get there, the kids can enjoy the best part of caching for kids, and that is trading treasures! But then again with high likelihood of the cache being a micro these days, they probably won't be able to do that. But they would be able to sign their names!!

[+TrailGators]

... Evidentally some people like geocaching near garbage dumpsters. Now who would have been visiting those places prior to geocaching.....

 

Caches have taken me to places that I find interesting that I would have never heard about or otherwise been to. If the occasional dumpster is the price of admission, it's easy enough to pay. Diving is optional.

 

The more work people spend on defining an aesthic cache (meaning one enjoyed by all) the less viable caches there are and the less of the ones that I'd like to find that will be placed.

 

The thing about creativity is that like everthing else you can fit it to a bell curve. Some great stuff, some bad stuff. But chop off the low end of the curve and you will harm the high end.

You can shift bell curves to the left or the right. You can also make them narrower or wider. What is important for the fun factor is to "try" shift the bell curve away from garbage dumpster caches and towards interesting places. The definition of an interesting place would be any place that someone would want to take out of town friends/family to visit.

[+Renegade Knight]

... You can shift bell curves to the left or the right. You can also make them narrower or wider. What is important for the fun factor is to "try" shift the bell curve away from garbage dumpster caches and towards interesting places. The definition of an interesting place would be any place that someone would want to take out of town friends/family to visit.

 

If cache quality is a nice container, good swag, solid log book, and a pencil. You can certainly shift the bell curve. That's because you can define "quality cache". That of course has nothing to do with, Fun, or Creative.

 

If you can precicley define fun and creativity and how it relates to caching and cachees, I'm sure you could shift the curve. But my money is that you can't define it and even if you could define all around it that would resemple a box rather than a shift for the entire curve.

[+The Jester]

The definition of an interesting place would be any place that someone would want to take out of town friends/family to visit.

Sorry, we'll have to disagree on this. There are lots of places I find interesting that would not be a place I'd take out of town friends/family to. Mainly, I'm thinking of small spots around that are interesting (to me) because I live here (oddities but not tourist attractions).

[+TrailGators]

The definition of an interesting place would be any place that someone would want to take out of town friends/family to visit.

Sorry, we'll have to disagree on this. There are lots of places I find interesting that would not be a place I'd take out of town friends/family to. Mainly, I'm thinking of small spots around that are interesting (to me) because I live here (oddities but not tourist attractions).

I'm pretty sure that most people would never take out-of-town friends/family behind a shopping center near a smelly dumpster. I'm pretty sure that most people would never take out-of-town friends/family to a filthy area that reeks of urine because it is near a migrant home. Just because you can think of a few exceptions doesn't mean that it's not a good rule of thumb to "try" to follow.

[+Breaktrack]

First, I'm second generation, but it seems that generation creep has made me old school. I did find a lot old school caches and I did find a bunch of second generation caches...

 

What's different.

First there are a heck of lot more cachers. I went about 2 years before I ever met anyone on the trail. Now I can't hardly swing a noob around for a good toss without hitting another noob.

 

Next. Urbanization. There were urban caches back then...In parks, along the river. Cache sprawl had not yet taken place. Now you have cache sprawl. The parks filled up. But noobs still wanted to place caches so parking lots, strip malls, slag, and other spots started to creep into the landscapeing and cache sprawl started to take place.

 

Work. Then, 100 finds then meant 1000 miles on your rig. Not 100 as you made a quick loop over a couple of weekends. We all did the same caches because those were the only caches to be found. When we met at an event we already had a lot in common. We didn't have to work to figure out common caches. Now...you can cache for months in the same area and not actually find the same caches as anyone else.

 

Memory. Then I could recall all 100 finds. Now...I can't recall all 1000 finds. It makes it harder to talk shop when I can't recall the cache that didn't stick out.

 

Then, remote caches got found. If you wanted to go caching...you did the hike. Now even people who do like remote caches have so many to choose from that they get found less than before. Plus since you can't keep up in the urban world you have to make a point to go remote. Not a lot of people do that. So cachers themselves have become more urban than "the old schoolers". Even a lot of the old schoolers are now more urban. They just have roots that noobs don't have.

 

Respect. Then there was one or two caches in the area that if you did one or both, you got the respect of your fellow cachers. Especially if it was your first find. If you did 100 you got also got respect. Both meant that you did something extraordinary. Now noobs do 100 and think they have earned respect. They haven't. 100 means nothing now, but if you find some of those caches that the old schoolers are watching, they will notice and give you that respect. Along the way numbers no longer meant that you had had some grueling cache days and their value for earning respect was lost. Now you have to do the grueling caches for old school respect. Of course noobs are still able to impress other noobs with raw numbers.

 

Very, very well said.

 

Mac

[+TrailGators]

First, I'm second generation, but it seems that generation creep has made me old school. I did find a lot old school caches and I did find a bunch of second generation caches...

 

What's different.

First there are a heck of lot more cachers. I went about 2 years before I ever met anyone on the trail. Now I can't hardly swing a noob around for a good toss without hitting another noob.

 

Next. Urbanization. There were urban caches back then...In parks, along the river. Cache sprawl had not yet taken place. Now you have cache sprawl. The parks filled up. But noobs still wanted to place caches so parking lots, strip malls, slag, and other spots started to creep into the landscapeing and cache sprawl started to take place.

 

Work. Then, 100 finds then meant 1000 miles on your rig. Not 100 as you made a quick loop over a couple of weekends. We all did the same caches because those were the only caches to be found. When we met at an event we already had a lot in common. We didn't have to work to figure out common caches. Now...you can cache for months in the same area and not actually find the same caches as anyone else.

 

Memory. Then I could recall all 100 finds. Now...I can't recall all 1000 finds. It makes it harder to talk shop when I can't recall the cache that didn't stick out.

 

Then, remote caches got found. If you wanted to go caching...you did the hike. Now even people who do like remote caches have so many to choose from that they get found less than before. Plus since you can't keep up in the urban world you have to make a point to go remote. Not a lot of people do that. So cachers themselves have become more urban than "the old schoolers". Even a lot of the old schoolers are now more urban. They just have roots that noobs don't have.

 

Respect. Then there was one or two caches in the area that if you did one or both, you got the respect of your fellow cachers. Especially if it was your first find. If you did 100 you got also got respect. Both meant that you did something extraordinary. Now noobs do 100 and think they have earned respect. They haven't. 100 means nothing now, but if you find some of those caches that the old schoolers are watching, they will notice and give you that respect. Along the way numbers no longer meant that you had had some grueling cache days and their value for earning respect was lost. Now you have to do the grueling caches for old school respect. Of course noobs are still able to impress other noobs with raw numbers.

 

Very, very well said.

 

Mac

Yes it was.

[+The Jester]

The definition of an interesting place would be any place that someone would want to take out of town friends/family to visit.

Sorry, we'll have to disagree on this. There are lots of places I find interesting that would not be a place I'd take out of town friends/family to. Mainly, I'm thinking of small spots around that are interesting (to me) because I live here (oddities but not tourist attractions).

I'm pretty sure that most people would never take out-of-town friends/family behind a shopping center near a smelly dumpster. I'm pretty sure that most people would never take out-of-town friends/family to a filthy area that reeks of urine because it is near a migrant home. Just because you can think of a few exceptions doesn't mean that it's not a good rule of thumb to "try" to follow.

I have no idea why you chose such places for your reply - do you find them interesting? (Yeah, right!) My point was you were defining interesting places only as places you take out-of-towners, but there are lots of interesting places that are not tourist interesting. So I disagree with your definition of interesting. But I guess you won't agree to disagree, it's your way or no way (at least that's the tone of your reply).

[+sbell111]

'Hide caches that you would like to find.'

[+wandererrob]

'Hide caches that you would like to find.'

 

I agree. But who is it that actually enjoys dumpsters and parking lots??

[+Miragee]

'Hide caches that you would like to find.'

After a long day of hiking, and caching, when I'm dog-tired, but want to find just one more cache, I really appreciate that nice easy one under the lamppost skirt in the Home Depot parking lot.

[+briansnat]

'Hide caches that you would like to find.'

 

I agree. But who is it that actually enjoys dumpsters and parking lots??

 

There is a segment of the community that will log goose poopies if they can get a smiley for it.

[+TrailGators]

The definition of an interesting place would be any place that someone would want to take out of town friends/family to visit.

Sorry, we'll have to disagree on this. There are lots of places I find interesting that would not be a place I'd take out of town friends/family to. Mainly, I'm thinking of small spots around that are interesting (to me) because I live here (oddities but not tourist attractions).

I'm pretty sure that most people would never take out-of-town friends/family behind a shopping center near a smelly dumpster. I'm pretty sure that most people would never take out-of-town friends/family to a filthy area that reeks of urine because it is near a migrant home. Just because you can think of a few exceptions doesn't mean that it's not a good rule of thumb to "try" to follow.

I have no idea why you chose such places for your reply - do you find them interesting? (Yeah, right!) My point was you were defining interesting places only as places you take out-of-towners, but there are lots of interesting places that are not tourist interesting. So I disagree with your definition of interesting. But I guess you won't agree to disagree, it's your way or no way (at least that's the tone of your reply).

It's not my way or no way. I agree that there could be other places but following that rule of thumb would maybe reduce/stop caches placed in the examples I gave. I have come across caches in places like those examples on several occasions. I am also using more extreme examples to point out that there are caches out there that may meet the guidelines, but are very poor choices for cache locations. Can we agree on that? Edited May 22, 2007 by TrailGators

[+TrailGators]

'Hide caches that you would like to find.'

 

I agree. But who is it that actually enjoys dumpsters and parking lots??

 

There is a segment of the community that will log goose poopies if they can get a smiley for it.

Goose poopies... That's funny! Please don't flame me for laughing!

[+CheshireFrog]

'Hide caches that you would like to find.'

 

I agree. But who is it that actually enjoys dumpsters and parking lots??

 

Numbers Ho's, Newbies and people on record runs. It's not about the location, it's about density.

 

The point is: they don't inherently violate any rules, they're easily avoided, and as long as someone is enjoying them I don't care about them. They don't offend me simply by their existence.

[+LivesWithMonkeys]

The definition of an interesting place would be any place that someone would want to take out of town friends/family to visit.

Sorry, we'll have to disagree on this. There are lots of places I find interesting that would not be a place I'd take out of town friends/family to. Mainly, I'm thinking of small spots around that are interesting (to me) because I live here (oddities but not tourist attractions).

I'm pretty sure that most people would never take out-of-town friends/family behind a shopping center near a smelly dumpster. I'm pretty sure that most people would never take out-of-town friends/family to a filthy area that reeks of urine because it is near a migrant home. Just because you can think of a few exceptions doesn't mean that it's not a good rule of thumb to "try" to follow.

I have no idea why you chose such places for your reply - do you find them interesting? (Yeah, right!) My point was you were defining interesting places only as places you take out-of-towners, but there are lots of interesting places that are not tourist interesting. So I disagree with your definition of interesting. But I guess you won't agree to disagree, it's your way or no way (at least that's the tone of your reply).

It's not my way or no way. I agree that there could be other places but following that rule of thumb would maybe reduce/stop caches placed in the examples I gave. I have come across caches in places like those examples on several occasions. I am also using more extreme examples to point out that there are caches out there that may meet the guidelines, but are very poor choices for cache locations. Can we agree on that?

Personally, I don't want to judge any cache. To each their own. Leave micros under piles of goose poopies if you like. Just give me a way to compile a list of what I might consider "scenic" or "interesting" caches and to filter out what you might consider "scenic" or "interesting" caches.

[+tozainamboku]

'Hide caches that you would like to find.'

 

I agree. But who is it that actually enjoys dumpsters and parking lots??

I don't think I've ever found a cache in or on a dumpster. They're mostly in the area of the dumpster, maybe on the fence or gate around the dumpster. I think these cache get hidden there because these are usually out of sight of muggles. If you don't mind muggles you might as well hide them in the lamp post in front of the store. I have found caches on trash cans placed at the beginning of hiking trails for people to dispose of bags of their dog's poop. Talk about smelly.

 

Caches are placed in trashy, smelly places sometimes because the day they were hidden it wasn't smelly or trashy. Perhaps it had just rained, or the homeless guy hadn't moved in yet. Because people like to hide caches in areas that don't get alot of traffic they tend to also be in areas that get used as toilets or garbage dumps. I'll usually post something in my logs so that the owner can check it out and move their cache if they were not aware of the problem when the cache was placed.

[+Miragee]

The very first cache I hid a cache I hid was near a rural road, under a California Laurel bush, next to a challenging jeep road. It was sort of a "marker" for the trailhead for four caches further up the hill. It also had a good view, and there were pullouts on each side of the road.

 

That location got used as a toilet . . . obviously after I placed the cache. Sometimes locations are bad to begin with, in some people's opinion, but other times, cache hiders have no control over what happens to the location after they put out their cache.

[+TrailGators]

The very first cache I hid a cache I hid was near a rural road, under a California Laurel bush, next to a challenging jeep road. It was sort of a "marker" for the trailhead for four caches further up the hill. It also had a good view, and there were pullouts on each side of the road.

 

That location got used as a toilet . . . obviously after I placed the cache. Sometimes locations are bad to begin with, in some people's opinion, but other times, cache hiders have no control over what happens to the location after they put out their cache.

 

It sounds like some muggle had no control! Obviously, some caches can get muggled in many different ways.... Anyhow, I would move/archive any of my caches that were adversely impacted by some muggle like that. But the point was not to find a million reasons why someone may have originally placed a cache like that, but to discuss the ones that are being placed in places like that.

[+Miragee]

Well, back to the original question about "Old School" caches . . . Which ones of those in your area were outstanding examples of what caching was/should be . . . and which ones were just as bad as some being placed today?