The 8 Habits of Highly Effective Geocaching & Forum Posting

[+sbell111]

Perhaps your definition of failure is different than mine and that this is causing our communication difficulties.

 

Perhaps we could use the actual definition of failure which makes no references to "fun" but does mention attaining a favoured outcome. When people set out on geocache hunts they favour an outcome which includes them finding the cache, you are saying that they are wrong to do this?

You think they should set out favouring some other outcome?

Why wouldn't they just go eat pie?

A smiley wasn't mentioned at all but the smiley is dispensed by the cache owner and has nothing to do with this discussion at all and it is a red herring?

 

Please explain how your favoured outcome is a cache hunt which results in something other than finding a cache. You don't need to explain how you always have fun but I really want to know what outcome you think people should favour when they go out geocaching if it isn't finding a cache.

For me, a favored outcome is one where I enjoy the time away from my stressful life. If I didn't enjoy myself, I failed. If I enjoyed myself, I succeeded.

 

I also like pie, so leaving discontinuing a cache hunt that I was not enjoying to go eat pie would be a favored outcome and would put me in the win column.

Edited July 17, 2007 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

You didn't answer my question: Would there have been any way for that hider to make that new multicache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding new 2.5/1.5 multicaches?

Actually, what you asked was this:

Would there have been any way for that hiker to make that movie more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

I'll go ahead and answer your new question, though.

 

If you are equating the 'hider' with the producer of the movie, I guess you could require all movie producers to call you before making a movie to see if it passes the TrailBlazer's test.

You are not capable of a civil discussion, are you? Thanks for mocking my name and my suggestion of hiders using more creativity and thought into creating their caches.

What in the world are you talking about???

Get a grip. It was a typo.

[+TrailGators]

You didn't answer my question: Would there have been any way for that hider to make that new multicache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding new 2.5/1.5 multicaches?

Actually, what you asked was this:

Would there have been any way for that hiker to make that movie more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

I'll go ahead and answer your new question, though.

 

If you are equating the 'hider' with the producer of the movie, I guess you could require all movie producers to call you before making a movie to see if it passes the TrailBlazer's test.

You are not capable of a civil discussion, are you? Thanks for mocking my name and my suggestion of hiders using more creativity and thought into creating their caches.

What in the world are you talking about???

It was a typo.

...and I have some swampland in Florida that I'd like to sell you.... Edited July 17, 2007 by TrailGators

[+wavector]

If the hider has put his cache in a bad place, as happened here recently, or rates his cache incorrectly, or has posted incorrect coordinates, and subsequently receives critical logs, the cache hider "Loses." We cannot control other people's choices about where they put their caches or what size or type of container they use. Although our cache logs might influence them later.

 

So you accept that critical logs may play a part in geocaching? I think they do.

Do you think those who write the critical logs do so because they had so much fun?

Are you suggesting that cache hiders have complete control over the caches they hide?

 

Does sbell111 really agree?

[+DocDiTTo]

I'm definitely beginning to see a pattern to every thread started by Snoogans.

[+sbell111]

You didn't answer my question: Would there have been any way for that hider to make that new multicache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding new 2.5/1.5 multicaches?

Actually, what you asked was this:

Would there have been any way for that hiker to make that movie more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

I'll go ahead and answer your new question, though.

 

If you are equating the 'hider' with the producer of the movie, I guess you could require all movie producers to call you before making a movie to see if it passes the TrailBlazer's test.

You are not capable of a civil discussion, are you? Thanks for mocking my name and my suggestion of hiders using more creativity and thought into creating their caches.

What in the world are you talking about???

It was a typo.

...and I have some swampland in Florida that I'd like to sell you....

While I could care less if you believe me or not, my wife's car is a Chevy TrailBlazer. Many people saw me drive it at GW2. I typed TrailBlazer instead of TrailGator in error because it is a word that I use much, much, much more often.

 

Try to get over it.

[+sbell111]

If the hider has put his cache in a bad place, as happened here recently, or rates his cache incorrectly, or has posted incorrect coordinates, and subsequently receives critical logs, the cache hider "Loses." We cannot control other people's choices about where they put their caches or what size or type of container they use. Although our cache logs might influence them later.

So you accept that critical logs may play a part in geocaching? I think they do.

Do you think those who write the critical logs do so because they had so much fun?

Are you suggesting that cache hiders have complete control over the caches they hide?

 

Does sbell111 really agree?

Why wouldn't I agree with Miragee's post?

[+TrailGators]

You didn't answer my question: Would there have been any way for that hider to make that new multicache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding new 2.5/1.5 multicaches?

Actually, what you asked was this:

Would there have been any way for that hiker to make that movie more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

I'll go ahead and answer your new question, though.

 

If you are equating the 'hider' with the producer of the movie, I guess you could require all movie producers to call you before making a movie to see if it passes the TrailBlazer's test.

You are not capable of a civil discussion, are you? Thanks for mocking my name and my suggestion of hiders using more creativity and thought into creating their caches.

What in the world are you talking about???

It was a typo.

...and I have some swampland in Florida that I'd like to sell you....

While I could care less if you believe me or not, my wife's car is a Chevy TrailBlazer. Many people saw me drive it at GW2. I typed TrailBlazer instead of TrailGator in error because it is a word that I use much, much, much more often.

 

Try to get over it.

My BS meter is now pegged...

[+sbell111]

You didn't answer my question: Would there have been any way for that hider to make that new multicache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding new 2.5/1.5 multicaches?

Actually, what you asked was this:

Would there have been any way for that hiker to make that movie more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

I'll go ahead and answer your new question, though.

 

If you are equating the 'hider' with the producer of the movie, I guess you could require all movie producers to call you before making a movie to see if it passes the TrailBlazer's test.

You are not capable of a civil discussion, are you? Thanks for mocking my name and my suggestion of hiders using more creativity and thought into creating their caches.

What in the world are you talking about???

It was a typo.

...and I have some swampland in Florida that I'd like to sell you....

While I could care less if you believe me or not, my wife's car is a Chevy TrailBlazer. Many people saw me drive it at GW2. I typed TrailBlazer instead of TrailGator in error because it is a word that I use much, much, much more often.

 

Try to get over it.

My BS meter is now pegged...

Is this your attempt at avoiding the topic?

Avoiding the topic, TrailGators is.

Edited July 17, 2007 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

OK, I'll try asking the question one more time:

Would there have been any way for that hider to make that cache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

[+sbell111]

OK, I'll try asking the question one more time:

Would there have been any way for that hider to make that cache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

Some people likely enjoy that cache as is. Heck, perhaps the cache owner is trying to make a statement about the downfall of society. Who knows.

 

If the cache is giving the experience that the cache owner is going for, I'd say that the cache owner is very successful.

[+Miragee]

OK, I'll try asking the question one more time:

Would there have been any way for that hider to make that cache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

Some people likely enjoy that cache as is. Heck, perhaps the cache owner is trying to make a statement about the downfall of society. Who knows.

 

If the cache is giving the experience that the cache owner is going for, I'd say that the cache owner is very successful.

I agree. If the cache hider had fun placing that cache, and they had their own reasons for putting the waypoints where they did, they put themselves in the "Win" column.

 

If their math is wrong, and the cacher, who chose to start a Multi in that location, cannot find the next waypoint, or the final, hopefully they still had fun.

 

Their cache log will alert the cache owner to a problem, and they will fix it, either by correcting their math, or by Archiving the cache. If they don't fix it, they will remain in the "Lose" column with every DNF log they receive before someone posts an SBA log and a Reviewer Archives the cache.

 

There was a cache similar to the one described, which I attempted one night. It had incorrect math that was fixed. Subsequent cachers, who made the choice to look for that Multi, presumably had fun. If they didn't, that is not the cache hider's fault.

 

There was a Baskin-Robbins nearby. The cacher could have quit anytime they wanted to and go eat ice cream.

 

Edit to fix code . . .

Edited July 17, 2007 by Miragee

[+wavector]

For me, a favored outcome is one where I enjoy the time away from my stressful life. If I didn't enjoy myself, I failed. If I enjoyed myself, I succeeded.

 

If eating pie is guaranteed to be fun why do you geocache?

Geocaching is more than a solitary feel good activity like eating a pie you made.

 

People seek geocaches for their own reasons and they can choose whatever caches they wish but the only thing offered as choices are cache pages owned by other geocachers, that is why geocaching is a one way street. Every time you go out geocaching you have the opportunity to connect with another geocacher, your efforts represent only part of the adventure, the outcome is entirely in the hands of the cache hider. Cache hiders can negatively impact seekers in many ways and the seeker is not to blame. If you find yourself in a situation where the decisions of the cache hider negatively impact your experience the correct thing to do is be honest in your log and do not be afraid to constructively criticize, the hider can use that feedback to improve their hides.

 

Do not go and hide behind an aphorism and take all the blame, there is no need to do that. Geocaching has become saddled with aphorisms, there are people who will tell you that "one man's trash is another man's treasure" and actually suggest it is OK to leave broken items in caches, they say it is fine because someone might enjoy those items. There are people who would have you believe that you can "play your own game your own way" and the truth is you can't seek your own caches, you have to play the game the way another person intends. Insisting that seekers are personally responsible for having fun is just another aphorism with no meaning, it bears no relationship to the real world and offers no useful instructions for those who are negatively impacted by a cache hiders decisions or shortcomings.

[+TrailGators]

OK, I'll try asking the question one more time:

Would there have been any way for that hider to make that cache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

Some people likely enjoy that cache as is. Heck, perhaps the cache owner is trying to make a statement about the downfall of society. Who knows.

 

If the cache is giving the experience that the cache owner is going for, I'd say that the cache owner is very successful.

But for those that did not enjoy the ending of this cache how could they have avoided it? There was no way for the finder to predict the outcome of this new multi. So the hider had a lot to do with the fun factor. I also thought this was a family game. So I would have made the cache more family friendly by avoiding the spot where the final cache was placed in that example.

[+sbell111]

For me, a favored outcome is one where I enjoy the time away from my stressful life. If I didn't enjoy myself, I failed. If I enjoyed myself, I succeeded.

If eating pie is guaranteed to be fun why do you geocache?

There are many things that I enjoy. Geocaching and pie are two of them.

Geocaching is more than a solitary feel good activity like eating a pie you made.

Geocaching can be many things to many people. BTW, while I do make a pretty good apple pie, I prefer to eat pies that other people make.

People seek geocaches for their own reasons and they can choose whatever caches they wish but the only thing offered as choices are cache pages owned by other geocachers, that is why geocaching is a one way street. Every time you go out geocaching you have the opportunity to connect with another geocacher, your efforts represent only part of the adventure, the outcome is entirely in the hands of the cache hider. Cache hiders can negatively impact seekers in many ways and the seeker is not to blame.

Again, I have to disagree. All of the seeking-related decisions are mine. Therefore, I am responsible for my fun.

If you find yourself in a situation where the decisions of the cache hider negatively impact your experience the correct thing to do is be honest in your log and do not be afraid to constructively criticize, the hider can use that feedback to improve their hides.

I actually agree with this point. However, I think we disagree on when it is that the hider is responsible and when the seeker is.

Do not go and hide behind an aphorism and take all the blame, there is no need to do that. Geocaching has become saddled with aphorisms, there are people who will tell you that "one man's trash is another man's treasure" and actually suggest it is OK to leave broken items in caches, they say it is fine because someone might enjoy those items. There are people who would have you believe that you can "play your own game your own way" and the truth is you can't seek your own caches, you have to play the game the way another person intends. Insisting that seekers are personally responsible for having fun is just another aphorism with no meaning, it bears no relationship to the real world and offers no useful instructions for those who are negatively impacted by a cache hiders decisions or shortcomings.

I disagree with practically everything in that paragraph. Let's just leave it at that. Edited July 17, 2007 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

OK, I'll try asking the question one more time:

Would there have been any way for that hider to make that cache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

Some people likely enjoy that cache as is. Heck, perhaps the cache owner is trying to make a statement about the downfall of society. Who knows.

 

If the cache is giving the experience that the cache owner is going for, I'd say that the cache owner is very successful.

But for those that did not enjoy the ending of this cache how could they have avoided it? There was no way for the finder to predict the outcome of this new multi. So the hider had a lot to do with the fun factor. I also thought this was a family game. So I would have made the cache more family friendly by avoiding the spot where the final cache was placed in that example.

I'm thinking that if you didn't enjoy the first couple of stages, you could have known to avoid the last few. Edited July 17, 2007 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

OK, I'll try asking the question one more time:

Would there have been any way for that hider to make that cache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

Some people likely enjoy that cache as is. Heck, perhaps the cache owner is trying to make a statement about the downfall of society. Who knows.

 

If the cache is giving the experience that the cache owner is going for, I'd say that the cache owner is very successful.

But for those that did not enjoy the ending of this cache how could they have avoided it? There was no way for the finder to predict the outcome of this new multi. So the hider had a lot to do with the fun factor. I also thought this was a family game. So I would have made the cache more family friendly by avoiding the spot where the final cache was placed in that example.

I'm thinking that if you don't enjoy the first couple of stages, you could have known to avoid the last few.

I'm sure that some families would have enjoyed the first stages. Little did they know what they were heading into... Edited July 17, 2007 by TrailGators

[+Miragee]

<snip>

 

People seek geocaches for their own reasons and they can choose whatever caches they wish but the only thing offered as choices are cache pages owned by other geocachers, that is why geocaching is a one way street. Every time you go out geocaching you have the opportunity to connect with another geocacher, your efforts represent only part of the adventure, the outcome is entirely in the hands of the cache hider.

I disagree with the last statement. I have an LPC. Several people who have found that cache have had fun experiences during their time in that parking lot. Other people have found it just for the "Smilie." I have no control of what happens to the people who arrive at that location.

 

Cache hiders can negatively impact seekers in many ways and the seeker is not to blame. If you find yourself in a situation where the decisions of the cache hider negatively impact your experience the correct thing to do is be honest in your log and do not be afraid to constructively criticize, the hider can use that feedback to improve their hides.

I agree that honesty in cache logs is important, but not if the reason I did not like the cache is because I, personally, am not comfortable in that location. If I later had an opportunity to return to that location with another cacher, or a group of cachers, I might have a great time.

 

On another tangent, a cacher can have a terrible time at a cache because they did not read the cache page. I got a very critical log on one of my caches and I'm still waiting for the cacher to go back, re-read the cache page to see that the error was their's, and edit their log.

[+sbell111]

OK, I'll try asking the question one more time:

Would there have been any way for that hider to make that cache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

Some people likely enjoy that cache as is. Heck, perhaps the cache owner is trying to make a statement about the downfall of society. Who knows.

 

If the cache is giving the experience that the cache owner is going for, I'd say that the cache owner is very successful.

But for those that did not enjoy the ending of this cache how could they have avoided it? There was no way for the finder to predict the outcome of this new multi. So the hider had a lot to do with the fun factor. I also thought this was a family game. So I would have made the cache more family friendly by avoiding the spot where the final cache was placed in that example.

I'm thinking that if you don't enjoy the first couple of stages, you could have known to avoid the last few.

I'm sure that some families would have enjoyed the first stages. Little did they know what they were heading into...

In case some readers have forgotten your hypothetical example, I believe that this is it:

 

2.5/1.5 multi

Stage 1 - micro in a bush outside a Burger King drive-thru

Stage 2 - micro stuck under a metal table at a Starbucks

Stage 3 - lamp post in a Target parking lot contains clue that requires date from a movie.

Final - large area full of river rock, trashy with a urine smell (good spot for CITO?)

 

I suspect that this multi would be enjoyed by many. Hopefully, CITO would be performed at final location. It likely won't destroy the family unit.

Edited July 17, 2007 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

OK, I'll try asking the question one more time:

Would there have been any way for that hider to make that cache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

Some people likely enjoy that cache as is. Heck, perhaps the cache owner is trying to make a statement about the downfall of society. Who knows.

 

If the cache is giving the experience that the cache owner is going for, I'd say that the cache owner is very successful.

But for those that did not enjoy the ending of this cache how could they have avoided it? There was no way for the finder to predict the outcome of this new multi. So the hider had a lot to do with the fun factor. I also thought this was a family game. So I would have made the cache more family friendly by avoiding the spot where the final cache was placed in that example.

I'm thinking that if you don't enjoy the first couple of stages, you could have known to avoid the last few.

I'm sure that some families would have enjoyed the first stages. Little did they know what they were heading into...

In case some readers have forgotten your hypothetical example, I believe that this is it:

 

2.5/1.5 multi

Stage 1 - micro in a bush outside a Burger King drive-thru

Stage 2 - micro stuck under a metal table at a Starbucks

Stage 3 - lamp post in a Target parking lot contains clue that requires date from a movie.

Final - large area full of river rock, trashy with a urine smell (good spot for CITO?)

 

I suspect that this multi would be enjoyed by many. Hopefully, CITO would be performed at final location. It likely won't destroy the family unit.

Yes, My whole point was that it would DESTROY the family unit. Where do you come up with this stuff? My point was that the final stage was simply a poor choice when you consider the types of finders that will be trying to enjoy this cache. Maybe we need a family friendly attribute....

[+sbell111]

OK, I'll try asking the question one more time:

Would there have been any way for that hider to make that cache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

Some people likely enjoy that cache as is. Heck, perhaps the cache owner is trying to make a statement about the downfall of society. Who knows.

 

If the cache is giving the experience that the cache owner is going for, I'd say that the cache owner is very successful.

But for those that did not enjoy the ending of this cache how could they have avoided it? There was no way for the finder to predict the outcome of this new multi. So the hider had a lot to do with the fun factor. I also thought this was a family game. So I would have made the cache more family friendly by avoiding the spot where the final cache was placed in that example.

I'm thinking that if you don't enjoy the first couple of stages, you could have known to avoid the last few.

I'm sure that some families would have enjoyed the first stages. Little did they know what they were heading into...

In case some readers have forgotten your hypothetical example, I believe that this is it:

 

2.5/1.5 multi

Stage 1 - micro in a bush outside a Burger King drive-thru

Stage 2 - micro stuck under a metal table at a Starbucks

Stage 3 - lamp post in a Target parking lot contains clue that requires date from a movie.

Final - large area full of river rock, trashy with a urine smell (good spot for CITO?)

 

I suspect that this multi would be enjoyed by many. Hopefully, CITO would be performed at final location. It likely won't destroy the family unit.

Yes, My whole point was that it would DESTROY the family unit. Where do you come up with this stuff? My point was that the final stage was simply a poor choice when you consider the types of finders that will be trying to enjoy this cache. Maybe we need a family friendly attribute....

Your previous post was practically GEOCACHING DOESN'T CARE ABOUT CHINLDREN Edited July 17, 2007 by sbell111

[+Always & Forever 5]

<snip>

 

People seek geocaches for their own reasons and they can choose whatever caches they wish but the only thing offered as choices are cache pages owned by other geocachers, that is why geocaching is a one way street. Every time you go out geocaching you have the opportunity to connect with another geocacher, your efforts represent only part of the adventure, the outcome is entirely in the hands of the cache hider.

 

This is quite possibly the most pitiful post I've read in a long time. To place 100% of the responsibility for fun on the hider ("the outcome is entirely in the hands of the cache hider") is ludicrous. If you only make from life what others offer, your whole journey on Big Blue is all for naught. You must exist trapped in a horribly mediocre life, living as a victim of society.

 

How sad.

 

We choose to have an "adventure" every cache we find, no matter how 'lame' someone else might think it is. It's not that hard, really. You ought to try it some time.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

<snip>

 

People seek geocaches for their own reasons and they can choose whatever caches they wish but the only thing offered as choices are cache pages owned by other geocachers, that is why geocaching is a one way street. Every time you go out geocaching you have the opportunity to connect with another geocacher, your efforts represent only part of the adventure, the outcome is entirely in the hands of the cache hider.

 

This is quite possibly the most pitiful post I've read in a long time. To place 100% of the responsibility for fun on the hider ("the outcome is entirely in the hands of the cache hider") is ludicrous. If you only make from life what others offer, your whole journey on Big Blue is all for naught. You must exist trapped in a horribly mediocre life, living as a victim of society.

 

How sad.

 

We choose to have an "adventure" every cache we find, no matter how 'lame' someone else might think it is. It's not that hard, really. You ought to try it some time.

While it was stated a bit strongly, I must agree with the observations shared above by Always & Forever 5. Further, I would add that I found that the closing phrase by wavector, namely "...the outcome is entirely in the hands of the cache hider" to be one with which I violently disagree.

[+TrailGators]

OK, I'll try asking the question one more time:

Would there have been any way for that hider to make that cache more enjoyable for those that enjoy finding a brand new 2.5/1.5 multicache?

Some people likely enjoy that cache as is. Heck, perhaps the cache owner is trying to make a statement about the downfall of society. Who knows.

 

If the cache is giving the experience that the cache owner is going for, I'd say that the cache owner is very successful.

But for those that did not enjoy the ending of this cache how could they have avoided it? There was no way for the finder to predict the outcome of this new multi. So the hider had a lot to do with the fun factor. I also thought this was a family game. So I would have made the cache more family friendly by avoiding the spot where the final cache was placed in that example.

I'm thinking that if you don't enjoy the first couple of stages, you could have known to avoid the last few.

I'm sure that some families would have enjoyed the first stages. Little did they know what they were heading into...

In case some readers have forgotten your hypothetical example, I believe that this is it:

 

2.5/1.5 multi

Stage 1 - micro in a bush outside a Burger King drive-thru

Stage 2 - micro stuck under a metal table at a Starbucks

Stage 3 - lamp post in a Target parking lot contains clue that requires date from a movie.

Final - large area full of river rock, trashy with a urine smell (good spot for CITO?)

 

I suspect that this multi would be enjoyed by many. Hopefully, CITO would be performed at final location. It likely won't destroy the family unit.

Yes, My whole point was that it would DESTROY the family unit. Where do you come up with this stuff? My point was that the final stage was simply a poor choice when you consider the types of finders that will be trying to enjoy this cache. Maybe we need a family friendly attribute....

Your previous post was practically GEOCACHING DOESN'T CARE ABOUT CHINLDREN

Geocaching is not some entity; it is us. We decide. I can't speak for you but I certainly care. I will always try to be considerate of all the people that could find my cache when I hide it. Doing so creates a WIN-WIN cache for all potential finders and me! Edited July 17, 2007 by TrailGators

[+sbell111]

I'm sure that some families would have enjoyed the first stages. Little did they know what they were heading into...

In case some readers have forgotten your hypothetical example, I believe that this is it:

 

2.5/1.5 multi

Stage 1 - micro in a bush outside a Burger King drive-thru

Stage 2 - micro stuck under a metal table at a Starbucks

Stage 3 - lamp post in a Target parking lot contains clue that requires date from a movie.

Final - large area full of river rock, trashy with a urine smell (good spot for CITO?)

 

I suspect that this multi would be enjoyed by many. Hopefully, CITO would be performed at final location. It likely won't destroy the family unit.

Yes, My whole point was that it would DESTROY the family unit. Where do you come up with this stuff? My point was that the final stage was simply a poor choice when you consider the types of finders that will be trying to enjoy this cache. Maybe we need a family friendly attribute....

Your previous post was practically GEOCACHING DOESN'T CARE ABOUT CHINLDREN

Geocaching is not some entity; it is us. We decide. I can't speak for you but I certainly care. I will always try to be considerate of all the people that could find my cache when I hide it. Doing so creates a WIN-WIN cache for all potential finders and me!

There is 'considerate' and then there is 'controlling'. I believe that I have been considerate. Edited July 17, 2007 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

I'm sure that some families would have enjoyed the first stages. Little did they know what they were heading into...

In case some readers have forgotten your hypothetical example, I believe that this is it:

 

2.5/1.5 multi

Stage 1 - micro in a bush outside a Burger King drive-thru

Stage 2 - micro stuck under a metal table at a Starbucks

Stage 3 - lamp post in a Target parking lot contains clue that requires date from a movie.

Final - large area full of river rock, trashy with a urine smell (good spot for CITO?)

 

I suspect that this multi would be enjoyed by many. Hopefully, CITO would be performed at final location. It likely won't destroy the family unit.

Yes, My whole point was that it would DESTROY the family unit. Where do you come up with this stuff? My point was that the final stage was simply a poor choice when you consider the types of finders that will be trying to enjoy this cache. Maybe we need a family friendly attribute....

Your previous post was practically GEOCACHING DOESN'T CARE ABOUT CHINLDREN

Geocaching is not some entity; it is us. We decide. I can't speak for you but I certainly care. I will always try to be considerate of all the people that could find my cache when I hide it. Doing so creates a WIN-WIN cache for all potential finders and me!

I believe that I have been considerate.

If you haven't hidden a cache similar to the one I described, than you have been considerate.

[+sbell111]

I'm sure that some families would have enjoyed the first stages. Little did they know what they were heading into...

In case some readers have forgotten your hypothetical example, I believe that this is it:

 

2.5/1.5 multi

Stage 1 - micro in a bush outside a Burger King drive-thru

Stage 2 - micro stuck under a metal table at a Starbucks

Stage 3 - lamp post in a Target parking lot contains clue that requires date from a movie.

Final - large area full of river rock, trashy with a urine smell (good spot for CITO?)

 

I suspect that this multi would be enjoyed by many. Hopefully, CITO would be performed at final location. It likely won't destroy the family unit.

Yes, My whole point was that it would DESTROY the family unit. Where do you come up with this stuff? My point was that the final stage was simply a poor choice when you consider the types of finders that will be trying to enjoy this cache. Maybe we need a family friendly attribute....

Your previous post was practically GEOCACHING DOESN'T CARE ABOUT CHINLDREN

Geocaching is not some entity; it is us. We decide. I can't speak for you but I certainly care. I will always try to be considerate of all the people that could find my cache when I hide it. Doing so creates a WIN-WIN cache for all potential finders and me!

I believe that I have been considerate.

If you haven't hidden a cache similar to the one I described, than you have been considerate.

whatever.

[+wavector]

It is such a simple concept that hiding behind an aphorism is useless.

Those supporting the aphorism are free to point out the errors in my list.

It isn't a philosophical list, it is a factual list. It isn't what I think, it is what actually exists out there.

It is the activity of geocaching as we know it today.

 

The cache hider decides where the cache will be placed.

The cache hider decides how much information will be given on the page.

The cache hider decides all the ratings for terrain and difficulty.

The cache hider decides which container will be used.

The cache hider decides what will constitute a find.

The cache hider decides how much work will be required to claim a find.

The cache hider is responsible for the upkeep and the maintenance of the hide.

The cache hider decides what the contents will be or if the cache can even contain contents.

The cache hider decides what will be listed for the container size.

The cache hider decides whether any information will be given by previous logs.

The cache hider decides when the cache can be hunted, disabling a cache at will for any reason.

The cache hider decides if there is adequate permission.

The cache hider decides if the cache seeker has found the cache.

The cache hider decides if the cache seeker will get to claim a find on the cache.

The cache hider decides if the cache seekers log will be allowed to stand as it is written.

 

Tearing down faulty reasoning is fairly easy, I will do it to Vinny's list because he is turning violent.

 

The seeker is totally in control of which route he/she will take to the cache from the parking area, and also in control of where to park.

The cache seeker is free to park in Memphis or on the other side of town. The cache seeker can darn well park where ever they want, that is control. They can park in the first free spot the y find in any parking lot and walk from there. Alternately they can rely on the cache owner information and park in the vicintiy of the cache

 

The seeker is in control of how well-prepared they are to seek the cache, of whether he/she chose to read the cache listing page description in full,

The cache page is owned, written and controlled by the cache placer, you can read until your eyes are red and the only information you will get from the cache page is the information that the cache placer places on the page, you are forced to rely on the cache owner.

 

whether they chose to note and pay attention to the D/T rating,

Whether or not the D/T rating is correct is the purview of the owner, the cache seeker can comment on the D/T rating after they go out searching, they rely on the cache owner to provide relevant and correct information.

 

and whether they chose to note the hint,

The hint or lack of a hint is a choice made by the cache owner, the cache seeker can take the hint along and decode it in the field only to find there is no information provided, the cache owner decides if the hint will be helpful, not the seeker, the seeker has to rely on the cache owner to provide a useful hint.

 

or at least bring it along in case they may wish to use it.

Bringing the hint along ensures nothing, the cache owner may have left a long story in the hint section of the cache and no information, the cache owner is in charge of the hints, cache seekers have to rely on the cache owner.

 

The seeker is in control of deciding whether their skill level and equipment/gear match the difficulty and terrain ratings, as listed along with the attributes,

Since the listing is owned by the cache owner and all the information in the listing is decided and written by the cache owner, the cache seeker relies on the cache owner when they scrutinize the page and the attributes. If you take along a stroller because the owner says strollers work that doesn't mean it will work, seekers have to rely on the cache owner

 

other requirements and caveats listed on the cache listing page.

The cache owner can offer no caveats or incorrect caveats, the cache seeker is dependent upon any information provided by the cache owner.

 

Once he or she arrives on site, the seeker is in control of reevaluating whether their skill level and equipment/gear match the actual difficulty and terrain challenges of the cache (as opposed to those listed on that cache listing page)

Once the cache seeker reaches the trailhead they have no idea what is ahead. They may bring gear that is entirely inappropriate if the cache owner has not provided correct or reliable information. The cache seeker has to rely on the owner

 

And ultimately, the seeker is in control of whether they continue to seek the cache.

The seeker can always choose to be a quitter. At that point in time Vinny and sbell111 suggest that the seeker should remember that the outcome is entirely their own fault. With a small bit of diligence they could have had a successful outcome since they are actually in control.

 

As a solid illustration of this point, consider the following: When I am traveling in distant states/cities, I personally choose NOT to continue the search for perhaps 60% of the caches on my lis" once I arrive on site and see the actual setting/environment and get a chance to evaluate the lameness quotient and the legality/commonsense quotient for myself.

I am glad you can quit, I am also glad that you have never relied on incorrect information provided by the owner but maybe you can explain how you end up quitting on 6 out of 10 caches for "lameness quotient" or other reasons given your ability as a seeker to control the outcome of your cache hunts and your diligence in ascertaining facts from reading a cache page. Perhaps you relied on the owner?

 

Frankly, I think most of the responses that tout the aphorism are tripe, they really don't mean anything to people who are out geocaching. Look at what you wrote above, you act like the cache page is always perfect and the only shortcomings are seeker shortcomings, it is tripe, pure tripe, but let me guess - you like tripe. Then you go on to state that while you are out of town you quit 6 out of 10 times while geocaching, even though you just posted a big long mesaage about your "control" over the outcome. I suppose I could group you in with sbell111 as someone who doesn't favour the "finding of caches" as an outcome when you go geocadching. It may come as a surpise to you and sbell111 that most geocachers do favour the finding of a cache as an outcome. And that outcome makes the seeker dependent on the cache hider, all the time. You never acknowledged a single aspect of the role the cache hider plays in geocaching yet we are supposed to entertain your comments as relevant.

Edited July 17, 2007 by wavector

[+wavector]

We choose to have an "adventure" every cache we find

 

I suspect that starting from that location is good for you but perhaps you might actually read the thread as well?

Who is calling a cache lame, other than you that is?

It may come as a total surprise to you that geocaching is not life, that is another fact you might have encountered if you actually read the thread.

 

So when you go out geocaching what is it you seek, your own caches or do you actually make your adventures only out of what other people offer.

Are you seriously suggesting that geocachers can geocache without having geocaches to hunt?

Do you think they can hide their own geocaches, is that what you are saying?

 

Now sbell111 and Vinny are saying that criticism has a place in geocaching, maybe you can explain why they would offer criticism if they were out having fun all the time as the aphorism says?

Is that disconnect obvious to you?

Do you think seekers have a right to criticize when the fact that they might not have enjoyed the cache is supposed to be entirely their own fault?

Edited July 17, 2007 by wavector

[+sbell111]

Is aphorism on a word of the day list somewhere?

[+sbell111]

Now sbell111 and Vinny are saying that criticism has a place in geocaching, maybe you can explain why they would offer criticism if they were out having fun all the time as the aphorism says?

Tigersan and I found this one after a brief battle with the flying monsters. The log is a bit damp, you might want to check it out. TNLN.

 

Thanks for the fun!!!

 

I hope this helped.

[Clan Riffster]

Frankly, I think most of the responses that tout the aphorism are tripe

His mind's made up folks. Don't confuse him with the facts.

While it's true that the hider is responsible for all aspects of cache creation, it is the seeker's value system that determines if the outcome was a success. If a cacher values smilies above all else, they may believe that anything short of a find constitutes failure. If their DNF is a result of something the hider did in error, (bad coords/etc), they may even blame the hider for their failure. What you are missing is that not everyone has the same value system. My success doesn't rely on a smiley. My success level is determined simply by how much fun I'm having at any given time, while playing this game. This is not utterly dependent upon the data provided by the hider.

 

While it's true that the choices made by the hider can affect how much fun I could potentially have, I have only myself to blame if I continue a hunt after my fun meter hits zero. In the case of the hypothetical multi TG brought up, my fun meter would hit zero as soon as my 60CSx pointed at a Burger King. That is the point where I would drive by and hunt something else, putting me firmly in control, (and ultimately responsible), for my own level of success.

Edited July 17, 2007 by Clan Riffster

[+Always & Forever 5]

You never acknowledged a single aspect of the role the cache hider plays in geocaching yet we are supposed to entertain your comments as relevant.

 

Hmmm...judging from YOUR list...

 

The cache hider decides where the cache will be placed.

The cache hider decides how much information will be given on the page.

The cache hider decides all the ratings for terrain and difficulty.

The cache hider decides which container will be used.

The cache hider decides what will constitute a find.

The cache hider decides how much work will be required to claim a find.

The cache hider is responsible for the upkeep and the maintenance of the hide.

The cache hider decides what the contents will be or if the cache can even contain contents.

The cache hider decides what will be listed for the container size.

The cache hider decides whether any information will be given by previous logs.

The cache hider decides when the cache can be hunted, disabling a cache at will for any reason.

The cache hider decides if there is adequate permission.

The cache hider decides if the cache seeker has found the cache.

The cache hider decides if the cache seeker will get to claim a find on the cache.

The cache hider decides if the cache seekers log will be allowed to stand as it is written.

 

You never acknowledged a single aspect of the role the cache seeker plays in geocaching yet we are supposed to entertain your comments as relevant.

 

How about that.

[+wavector]

I disagree with practically everything in that paragraph. Let's just leave it at that.

 

You use that "out" a lot in conversations in these forums.

Since the paragraph is easy to parse and easy to understand perhaps you can explain to everyone why you disagree. Do you think broken items are good swag items? Perhaps you can explain how geocachers can "play their own game in there own way" while they are limited to hunting caches hidden by other geocachers?

 

Simple cogent paragraphs can be disagreeable, it doesn't change the fact that they are factual. Here is the paragraph which you disagree with again, it doesn't look fact filled and it isn't, I only make a few points about aphorisms and the fact that they are genertally incorrect and useless but I gather that you are defending these other useless aphorisms as well?

 

Do not go and hide behind an aphorism and take all the blame, there is no need to do that. Geocaching has become saddled with aphorisms, there are people who will tell you that "one man's trash is another man's treasure" and actually suggest it is OK to leave broken items in caches, they say it is fine because someone might enjoy those items. There are people who would have you believe that you can "play your own game your own way" and the truth is you can't seek your own caches, you have to play the game the way another person intends. Insisting that seekers are personally responsible for having fun is just another aphorism with no meaning, it bears no relationship to the real world and offers no useful instructions for those who are negatively impacted by a cache hiders decisions or shortcomings.

[+Always & Forever 5]

I suspect that starting from that location is good for you but perhaps you might actually read the thread as well?

And, thanks for asking, but just because I haven't weighed in much on this topic, don't assume I haven't read the drivel. I've read every tired, worn out argument you've offered. You choose to be a victim. I accept that. I choose not to. Shame on me.

[+wavector]

You never acknowledged a single aspect of the role the cache seeker plays in geocaching yet we are supposed to entertain your comments as relevant.

 

How about that.

 

You are not Vinny, at least he tried to offer a list of things the cache seeker controlled.

I didn't make my suggestion that you should read the thread lightly, you really should. The counter point to the cache hider list was -

 

The cache seeker gets to go out and try to find the cache.

 

How about that.

[+TrailGators]

In the case of the hypothetical multi TG brought up, my fun meter would hit zero as soon as my 60CSx pointed at a Burger King. That is the point where I would drive by and hunt something else, putting me firmly in control, (and ultimately responsible), for my own level of success.

CR I think you missed my point. What if I changed the first three waypoints to something you would do and then you ended up at the same final. Obvoiusly, your fun meter would drop to zero (or below zero), but it is your fault for not liking a dirty smelly area?

[+wavector]

Shame on me.

 

Well said.

[+Always & Forever 5]

Shame on me.

 

Well said.

 

'Nuff said.

[+TrailGators]

When you stand back and look at this thread it becomes apparent that the truth is somewhere in the middle. There are caches that are 100% not fun because of the hider and there are caches that are 100% not fun because of the seeker. Then there is most everything in between. I could come up with examples of all types. So I think the original 7 habits idea could be applied to the hider and/or the seeker depending on the cache in question.....

Edited July 17, 2007 by TrailGators

[+wavector]

it is the seeker's value system that determines if the outcome was a success.

 

I don't have to redefine words to reach my conclusions. I don't have to redefine geocaching either. Geocaching is more than having fun, eating pie is having fun yet there is no corollary between the two actions, geocaching does consist of doing something more than having fun.

Success is reaching a favoured outcome, you are suggesting that geocachers who favour finding caches are doing something wrong? Do you tell new geocachers that geocaching is going out and wandering around a bit? The smiley is dispensed by the cache owner and has nothing to do with this conversation at all, why do you and sbell111 keep referring to smilies? I haven't mentioned smilies once except in response to those who insist that they matter like you and sbell111, they don't play any part in this conversation.

 

Deeming success as "finding a geocache when hunting for one" is not that big a stretch for most people. It may surprise you that many geocachers actually set out to "find a geocache" when they go geocaching.

 

Conversely the seekers value system plays no part in "finding a geocache", you and sbell111 are free to plumb that path, perhaps everyone will accept that "finding a geocache" should not be part of geocaching at all and geocaching is really a value system adopted by the seeker, but I seriously doubt if anyone will believe you guys.

 

The facts are penetrating, at least you acknowledge that the cache hider is in control of their cache.

[+Renegade Knight]

Things within the Seekers control.

 

The path they take to the cache.

Attitude about the hunt.

Whether or not to read the cache page.

Breaking laws that are inconvenient.

Treading lightly or tearing up the area.

Replacing the cache.

Moving the cache.

Logging the physical log (or not)

Logging online (or not)

Meeting ALR’s.

Ignoring the cache once found.

Being safe.

Posting Needs Maintance Logs

Posting SBA’s

Having an opinion on the SBA.

Following good land access ethics. (or not)

Trading.

Closing the container.

 

The cache owner controls none of these things.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Conversely the seekers value system plays no part in "finding a geocache",....

 

It plays a large part in finding a cache and impacts everthing about how they go about the entire RASH that is geocaching. You can't separate people from their values, and values impact how people view the world, and how they conduct themselves within it. This includes how they go about geocaching.

[+wavector]

Now sbell111 and Vinny are saying that criticism has a place in geocaching, maybe you can explain why they would offer criticism if they were out having fun all the time as the aphorism says?

Tigersan and I found this one after a brief battle with the flying monsters. The log is a bit damp, you might want to check it out. TNLN.

 

Thanks for the fun!!!

 

I hope this helped.

 

It didn't help at all.

 

Are you suggesting that reporting the facts is criticism?

Do you imagine that complaining that the log was wet and then telling the owner what they should do is criticism?

Redefining words isn't required and doesn't help you make your point.

 

Criticism isn't telling people what to do, criticism isn't a bare recital of facts, criticism entails judging.

If you don't make judgements you are not offering criticism. Criticism is essential if cache hiders are to receive feedback to help them hide better caches.

 

If you had said, "in this location this container is not able to protect the log and that is why the log is wet" you would be offering criticism.

If you said "in this location this container is not able to protect the log yet a better container might work fine here" then you would be offering constructive criticism.

 

I hope this helps.

Since you asked I went and looked and the actual word of the day on dictionary.com is gallimaufry!

[+Renegade Knight]

... There are caches that are 100% not fun because of the hider ...

 

This reminds me of two kids in a barn full of crap and nothing but shovels.

 

One kid sits down and cries.

 

The other starts digging like crazy with a big grin on his face. When asked why he's so happy standing in a barn full of crap the kid says. "With all this manure around there has to be a horse around here somewhere".

 

You get out of caching what you bring to it. The hider has the ability to influence things, but they can't make or break the finder. Some cache seekers are looking for horses and some are wallowing in crap.

[+TrailGators]

Things within the Seekers control.

 

The path they take to the cache.

Attitude about the hunt.

Whether or not to read the cache page.

Breaking laws that are inconvenient.

Treading lightly or tearing up the area.

Replacing the cache.

Moving the cache.

Logging the physical log (or not)

Logging online (or not)

Meeting ALR's.

Ignoring the cache once found.

Being safe.

Posting Needs Maintance Logs

Posting SBA's

Having an opinion on the SBA.

Following good land access ethics. (or not)

Trading.

Closing the container.

 

The cache owner controls none of these things.

Good list. Are you going to make a similar list for the hider?

[+Renegade Knight]

Things within the Seekers control.

 

The path they take to the cache.

Attitude about the hunt.

Whether or not to read the cache page.

Breaking laws that are inconvenient.

Treading lightly or tearing up the area.

Replacing the cache.

Moving the cache.

Logging the physical log (or not)

Logging online (or not)

Meeting ALR's.

Ignoring the cache once found.

Being safe.

Posting Needs Maintance Logs

Posting SBA's

Having an opinion on the SBA.

Following good land access ethics. (or not)

Trading.

Closing the container.

 

The cache owner controls none of these things.

Good list. Are you going to make a similar list for the hider?

 

I already did, maybe the post didn't stick?

[+Miragee]

When you stand back and look at this thread it becomes apparent that the truth is somewhere in the middle. There are caches that are 100% not fun because of the hider and there are caches that are 100% not fun because of the seeker. Then there is most everything in between. I could come up with examples of all types. So I think the original 7 habits idea could be applied to the hider and/or the seeker depending on the cache in question.....

This is not true. I have caches that would be 100% not fun for some people, those who don't like hikes, potential encounters with rattlesnakes, etc.

 

I have a LPC that would apparently be 100% not fun for you.

 

However, I had 100% fun placing each of the caches I placed, at the time I placed them.

 

There are caches that would be 100% not fun for me if I was by myself, in an urban area, feeling uncomfortable, but with a group of cachers, out for a fun day, on a Saturday afternoon, that same cache could be 100% fun . . . well, maybe 80% fun.

[+TrailGators]

... There are caches that are 100% not fun because of the hider ...

 

This reminds me of two kids in a barn full of crap and nothing but shovels.

 

One kid sits down and cries.

 

The other starts digging like crazy with a big grin on his face. When asked why he's so happy standing in a barn full of crap the kid says. "With all this manure around there has to be a horse around here somewhere".

 

You get out of caching what you bring to it. The hider has the ability to influence things, but they can't make or break the finder. Some cache seekers are looking for horses and some are wallowing in crap.

 

When hider's flat out ignore the guidelines, it can lead to situations that are close to 100% not fun for the seeker(s). We covered this earlier.

[+TrailGators]

When you stand back and look at this thread it becomes apparent that the truth is somewhere in the middle. There are caches that are 100% not fun because of the hider and there are caches that are 100% not fun because of the seeker. Then there is most everything in between. I could come up with examples of all types. So I think the original 7 habits idea could be applied to the hider and/or the seeker depending on the cache in question.....

This is not true. I have caches that would be 100% not fun for some people, those who don't like hikes, potential encounters with rattlesnakes, etc.

Miragee, you keep bringing this up. You can easily filter caches by difficulty, terrain, cache type and container type with a PQ. The site makes it very easy to do that. Let's talk about the caches after the seekers have done at least that much. I don't think anybody is that stupid where they would do a 10 mile hike unless they enjoyed doing that type of thing.