Whats the lamest cache you found?

[jholly]

Was out caching today. In the middle of a parking lot was a circular concrete curb with some river rocks in cement with a man hole in the middle. The cache was a fake sprinkler head tossed on the river rocks. Talk about drive by caching. sheesh. Rated 1.5 no less.

 

Jim

[+Snoogans]

Was out caching today. In the middle of a parking lot was a circular concrete curb with some river rocks in cement with a man hole in the middle. The cache was a fake sprinkler head tossed on the river rocks. Talk about drive by caching. sheesh. Rated 1.5 no less.

 

Jim

 

You should delete your find in protest. That'd show 'em.

 

Here's a gift horse for ya:

 

[+tozainamboku]

Was out caching today. In the middle of a parking lot was a circular concrete curb with some river rocks in cement with a man hole in the middle. The cache was a fake sprinkler head tossed on the river rocks. Talk about drive by caching. sheesh. Rated 1.5 no less.

 

Jim

 

You should delete your find in protest. That'd show 'em.

 

Here's a gift horse for ya:

 

<picture>

Come on Snoogans, don't be hard on the guy. He didn't call for lame caches to be banned. He just wants examples of what other people consider lame or perhaps over rated.

 

Personally I don't quite understand why everybody thinks they should be caching in Lake Wobegon where all the caches are above average. Some caches you find will be good and some will be stinkers. I guess you could look at the stinkers as a gift horse - perhaps the person that hid it was trying their best. But I figure if I don't like the cache I don't need to say thank you. I have a few where I've logged TNLNSL.

[+fizzymagic]

Actually, I think the OP has confused "easy to find" with "lame." A pretty common mistake for someone new to the sport, I suspect.

 

All a 1.5-difficulty rating implies to me is that the cache is not immediately visible and identifiable as a cache. So it sounds like this one was rated appropriately. Sounds to me like the sprinkler head may have moved from its original location; I can't imagine a cache hider just tossing one into the rocks.

 

As for lame, I can do much, much better. One of my favorites was a cache placed in a pile of rotting trash next to a dumpster behind a strip mall. I was somewhat concerned about contracting hepatitis just searching the area. Nowadays, I don't even bother to start looking for those.

[+Ambrosia]

When I started caching, we never needed caches to be clever or difficult to find. That came a bit later, as people started to try to be new and different.

 

The caches I found in the beginning were out in the open on the flat ground, large containers, covered with a cairn of local rocks. You could see it a mile away.

 

I'm happy with all sorts of hides, clever or easy. Variety is good.

Edited November 26, 2007 by Ambrosia

[+kingsting]

People have been having a lot of fun logging this one...

 

Lame cache

[+Earl B. Fisk]

People have been having a lot of fun logging this one...

 

Lame cache

 

That's hillarious! I read all of the posts -- I just had to see why there were three DNFs when there were pictures of the cache and the hide location (with circles and arrows explaining what each one was).

[+LDove]

<that above listed cache - what a hoot! Great idea by the way! In my opinion, every guardrail that faces a highway is lame, even though I still go get them, that is part of this addiction you know.

 

By the way, that horse needs a serious tooth cleaning, yech!

[+TrailGators]

People have been having a lot of fun logging this one...

 

Lame cache

Interesting study!

[+wimseyguy]

I'm ashamed to admit that some people have told me that this cache sucks.

[+Bushlight]

The ones that i place

[+Knight2000]

A rusty used skoal can wedged where a concrete picnic table meets the ground. The coords were dead on and we were looking in the nearby bushes/tree. Sat on the bench and thought "It couldn't be this piece of trash sitting here could it?" It was and i was ashamed that someone made trash into a cache.

[camgiff]

A rusty used skoal can wedged where a concrete picnic table meets the ground. The coords were dead on and we were looking in the nearby bushes/tree. Sat on the bench and thought "It couldn't be this piece of trash sitting here could it?" It was and i was ashamed that someone made trash into a cache.

i was looking for a cache one time and found a skoal tin wedged between 2 peices of metal, opened it and it was full of joint roaches

[knowschad]

Was out caching today. In the middle of a parking lot was a circular concrete curb with some river rocks in cement with a man hole in the middle. The cache was a fake sprinkler head tossed on the river rocks. Talk about drive by caching. sheesh. Rated 1.5 no less.

 

Jim

 

Are you certain that is the condition the cache was supposed to be in, or had it been muggled?

 

I think the worst one I've found was a baggie under a spruce tree. In the baggie was a wad of damp toilet paper. It was only the blue of the bleeding ink on the TP that even made me suspect this could be the cache. The cache name even indicated some sort of "surprise", so at the time, I thought the whole thing was a bad, but deliberate joke.

 

As it turned out, though, the cache was originally made to look like a small outhouse or toilet, and the reason for using TP for the log was obvious. But the cache had been muggled, and all I found was what remained. Point is... dont' assume that what looks like a bad cache was always a bad cache.

[knowschad]

i was looking for a cache one time and found a skoal tin wedged between 2 peices of metal, opened it and it was full of joint roaches

 

This thread is supposed to be about LAME caches.

 

Oh oh... I mean... wow, man, that is one LAME cache!! I'd really HATE to find one like that, man.

[jholly]

Fizzymagic - I see your only 514th, so I guess your still a little new at this also No I'm not confiusing easy to find with lame. Easy to find in fine. It is more like Ambrosia said, just laying there on the ground.

 

Others - I thought about being out of place, but the co-ords were spot on where I found it. Out of place would be like a 100 feet. I guess it could be 100 feet out of place with bad co-ords. That would make more sense since a 100 feet away were some bushes. But as found it was just laying there on the rocks.

 

Jim

[+FunnyNose]

Here is a really lame cache.. Lä Meássm Icrô

[+coreynjoey]

Here is a really lame cache.. Lä Meássm Icrô

 

 

OK, I'm a dork. I went to Google translate for that one. Geesh, I'm slow.

[+Glenn]

I don't find lame caches. Lame caches find me.

Is that a cache in your pocket or are just happy to see me?

[+wesleykey]

He just wants examples of what other people consider lame or perhaps over rated.

 

I logged one a few days ago that was a log in a ziploc wedged into a crack in a a tree trunk. No container at all, no swag, just a loose log.

[+Ambrosia]

Fizzymagic - I see your only 514th, so I guess your still a little new at this also No I'm not confiusing easy to find with lame. Easy to find in fine. It is more like Ambrosia said, just laying there on the ground.

 

Others - I thought about being out of place, but the co-ords were spot on where I found it. Out of place would be like a 100 feet. I guess it could be 100 feet out of place with bad co-ords. That would make more sense since a 100 feet away were some bushes. But as found it was just laying there on the rocks.

 

Jim

I think you misunderstaood me as saying that the caches I found out in the open when I first started caching I believed to be lame? Hey, that was back "in the good old days", in caching's infancy. Talk about easy caches. But not lame by any means.

 

 

 

 

[+cheech gang]

Second Worst Cache Ever

[+hikergps]

He just wants examples of what other people consider lame or perhaps over rated.

 

I logged one a few days ago that was a log in a ziploc wedged into a crack in a a tree trunk. No container at all, no swag, just a loose log.

 

That's not lame. I think using an entire tree as a container is pretty cool! Did you check any other cracks for swag?

[Tahosa and Sons]

In the days of yore there once was a very lame cache right alonside CO 14 on Cameron pass.

[+SuperDave_GPS]

Similar write-up to one above:

 

I once found a cache that was simply a plastic grocery bag that was tied to a fence that ran alongside of a traintrack. No container. Not even a Zip-Lock bag to keep things dry. Just the grocery bag.

 

Needless to say, the log book was so wet that it couldn't be signed so I just laminated one of my logbook stickers with Scotch-Tape and dropped it in the bag.

[Dinoprophet]

Lame multi:

Stage 1 - coordinates scrawled on the back of a street sign in permanent marker in the parking lot of a Denny's

Stage 2 - 50 feet away in a pile of trash

 

I have to admit, though, at least there was a container.

[+carleenp]

In the days of yore there once was a very lame cache right alonside CO 14 on Cameron pass.

 

[anital76]

I think you misunderstaood me as saying that the caches I found out in the open when I first started caching I believed to be lame? Hey, that was back "in the good old days", in caching's infancy. Talk about easy caches. But not lame by any means.

 

WOW! Ambrosia beautiful pics! Ok I really need to get out of the city lol. The views look like they would be worth the hike even if you never found the cache!

[+Machuco]

I found a cache in my area where the cache owner used a brown paper bag for cammo. That's pretty lame!

[+Scare Force One]

I really hate Walmart Micro's. It just seems like stiking a old pill bottle under a lamp in the middle of a asfault hunk is really lame, IMO.

 

~.~Scare Force One

[+private bones]

How bout the lamest cache I haven't found?

 

Finally put this one on the ignore list to get rid of it. According to the POed cachers that have attempted it: It's down a long private road peppered with threatening no tresspassing signs. Once you reach the cache location you have to climb over barbed wire fence. Cache owner doesn't appear to have permission to hide on private property.

 

The cache is a large suitcase with a log that has been wet for ...almost three years. Yep, moldy and smelly. A few cachers have tried to help with replacement logs, zip lock, etc but since the suitcase leaks profusely the logs are consistently wet. Although it has numerous needs maintenance attributes posted and lots of logs reporting all of the above, cachers still keep driving or biking all the way out to it and reporting that the suitcase is on private property and is full of water. And there it sits. No response from the owner. Three years of logs detailing the above. Oh yeah, and a few reports of fungus, mold, and colonies of slugs and bugs. Lame Geolitter at it's finest.

[+StarBrand]

Cache was one of the many pieces of roadside trash in a ditch. ewwwwwwwwww

[+Thrak]

It was a water bottle from the grocery store. It had been cut in half, swag was put into it, and then it was kind of stuffed back together. It was at the bottom of a steep bank of a seasonal storm control creek that gets really high and fast so it would be dangerous to attempt in winter and likely to wash away. It had bugs in it. It was somebody's first hide and is a prime example of why people should FIND a bunch of caches before placing one

[+Printess Caroline]

I didn't find it, but this is the lamest I've heard of. Another example of someone hiding before finding any. "Money" Check out the picture.

[+Thrak]

How bout the lamest cache I haven't found?

 

Finally put this one on the ignore list to get rid of it. According to the POed cachers that have attempted it: It's down a long private road peppered with threatening no tresspassing signs. Once you reach the cache location you have to climb over barbed wire fence. Cache owner doesn't appear to have permission to hide on private property.

 

The cache is a large suitcase with a log that has been wet for ...almost three years. Yep, moldy and smelly. A few cachers have tried to help with replacement logs, zip lock, etc but since the suitcase leaks profusely the logs are consistently wet. Although it has numerous needs maintenance attributes posted and lots of logs reporting all of the above, cachers still keep driving or biking all the way out to it and reporting that the suitcase is on private property and is full of water. And there it sits. No response from the owner. Three years of logs detailing the above. Oh yeah, and a few reports of fungus, mold, and colonies of slugs and bugs. Lame Geolitter at it's finest.

 

Sounds like you should post a Should Be Archived log.............

[+RosaBella]

I dont think I would call it the 'lamest' cache but it I have one posted that is really really easy to find!!! go to GCZTQZ and scroll down to see the picture of where it is... I have alot of fun with local cachers over this one and enjoy some of the logs people leave me...

 

www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=gcztqz

 

[+Ambrosia]

I think you misunderstaood me as saying that the caches I found out in the open when I first started caching I believed to be lame? Hey, that was back "in the good old days", in caching's infancy. Talk about easy caches. But not lame by any means.

 

WOW! Ambrosia beautiful pics! Ok I really need to get out of the city lol. The views look like they would be worth the hike even if you never found the cache!

Why thank you. I do believe I live in the best place on earth. The first cache was pretty grueling to get to, but so worth it. The second cache (last two pictures), was actually very close to the road, beyond a lookout spot. It's great, and I'm loving all the caches I go to (here and elsewhere), more than 5 years later.

[+Ambrosia]

How bout the lamest cache I haven't found?

 

Finally put this one on the ignore list to get rid of it. According to the POed cachers that have attempted it: It's down a long private road peppered with threatening no tresspassing signs. Once you reach the cache location you have to climb over barbed wire fence. Cache owner doesn't appear to have permission to hide on private property.

 

The cache is a large suitcase with a log that has been wet for ...almost three years. Yep, moldy and smelly. A few cachers have tried to help with replacement logs, zip lock, etc but since the suitcase leaks profusely the logs are consistently wet. Although it has numerous needs maintenance attributes posted and lots of logs reporting all of the above, cachers still keep driving or biking all the way out to it and reporting that the suitcase is on private property and is full of water. And there it sits. No response from the owner. Three years of logs detailing the above. Oh yeah, and a few reports of fungus, mold, and colonies of slugs and bugs. Lame Geolitter at it's finest.

 

Sounds like you should post a Should Be Archived log.............

Yeah, has anyone actually written to a local Reviewer about it?

[+private bones]

How bout the lamest cache I haven't found?

 

Finally put this one on the ignore list to get rid of it. According to the POed cachers that have attempted it: It's down a long private road peppered with threatening no tresspassing signs. Once you reach the cache location you have to climb over barbed wire fence. Cache owner doesn't appear to have permission to hide on private property.

 

The cache is a large suitcase with a log that has been wet for ...almost three years. Yep, moldy and smelly. A few cachers have tried to help with replacement logs, zip lock, etc but since the suitcase leaks profusely the logs are consistently wet. Although it has numerous needs maintenance attributes posted and lots of logs reporting all of the above, cachers still keep driving or biking all the way out to it and reporting that the suitcase is on private property and is full of water. And there it sits. No response from the owner. Three years of logs detailing the above. Oh yeah, and a few reports of fungus, mold, and colonies of slugs and bugs. Lame Geolitter at it's finest.

 

Sounds like you should post a Should Be Archived log.............

Yeah, has anyone actually written to a local Reviewer about it?

 

I don't know if anyone who has actually been to the cache has written a reviewer. But there have been several "needs maintenance" logs. If a cache has multiple needs maintenance attributes would a reviewer see that or is it soley directed to the owner?

 

Regarding a Should be Archived log... If a cache is stiill functioning, despite years of problems, should it be logged as a Should be Archived?

[Keystone]

Reviewers receive notifications of "Needs Archived" logs. The "Needs Maintenance" log type was created because the community wanted a way of attracting attention to a cache problem, but WITHOUT involving a cache reviewer.

 

If you think a cache violates the listing guidelines, including the maintenance guideline, and the owner isn't responsive to the problem, then consider using the "Needs Archived" option.

[+BooBooBee]

When I started caching, I was gung ho. But too many parking lot caches burned me out. Really...who cares about a film canister under a bush in a mall parking lot?! Well, I'm a country girl, so pavement doesn't thrill me.

 

But I've been trying to get back into the game, inspired by some friends. Tonight I thought I'd go for a couple of brand new caches here in town. TALK about UNINSPIRED!

 

I've been to the parking lot of one before plenty of times. Why would I want to cache here? And as for the other, well, it's a vacant field FULL of trash.

 

I posted a DNF note on both, and the owner actually sent me THIS back: "sorry you didn't find it yeah there is a lot of trash out there.

you are looking for a old fog light. it was laying upside down so all you see is

some metal hope you go back and try again have fun"

 

It's in a freakin piece of TRASH thrown out into a field full of trash! What the?!

 

So, I HAVE been inspired to go through and create my "ignore" bookmarks. If the owner doesn't site anything INTERESTING about the location and finders don't find any inspiration, then I "ignored" it.

 

SHEESH! Might as well throw trash in the dump and call it a cache!

[+Snoogans]

When I started caching, I was gung ho. But too many parking lot caches burned me out. Really...who cares about a film canister under a bush in a mall parking lot?!

 

Not to take away from your aesthetic reasoning, I get that, but lots of folks like those kinds of caches for whatever reason....

 

Personally, I pass on them before I have a reason to blame someone else for my own choice to hunt it in the first place. I mean, if the map is CLEARLY pointing to a mall parking lot, then I'm not compelled to go there on most days, but some day I might want a quickie cache and that one would fill the ticket. Especially if I needed to get something at Sears anyway.

 

The base value of geocaching is hide and seek, so I would assume that folks who enjoy finding these caches regularly enjoy finding hidden things MORE than a nice walk in a park, or a long hike in the forest. They're easy to please. Nothing at all wrong with that. Their aesthetic sensabilities are not offended unless they are a masochist or totally O.C. or both.

 

I once had a conversation with a local cache hound, whom I held in high regard, that did one of my virts on the way to a campout. He told me the answer rather than email it, said it was okay as virts go, and went on to rant about a local prolific hider of virts.

 

I asked him why he didn't just ignore her virts and his answer was, "I can't NOT log a cache," as if he had no choice in the matter and he would rather fix his blame for his wasted quaity time on her rather than himself. I thought that was pretty cheesy.

 

So I ask you... Did that parking lot cache lock out an opportunity for a cache to be hidden in some more aesthetically pleasing spot less than 528 feet away? If not was it published within guidelines? If so, how come so many folks can't stand the idea that they exist?

 

I'm glad you have decided to use the ignore feature. This is the part I don't get about other folks who rant ad nauseum about this type of hide or that.

 

Geocaching=Hide + Seek (very uncomplicated)

 

But some folks neeeeed Geocaching to = Hide + Top Quality Large Container + Breathtaking Scenery + Exercise + Convenient Parking + Wonderful NEW Swag that has ALWAYS Been Traded Evenly or Up + Restrooms at the Trailhead + Laser Perfect Coordinates + Someting for the Kiddos + Whatever Else it Takes to Float Their Boat on that Particular Day. (Ummm, ya just can't please EVERYONE.)

 

Now where the heck did I put the link to that that gift horse picture?

 

[CoyoteRed]

One end of the scale...

Geocaching=Hide + Seek (very uncomplicated)

...and the other.

But some folks neeeeed Geocaching to = Hide + Top Quality Large Container + Breathtaking Scenery + Exercise + Convenient Parking + Wonderful NEW Swag that has ALWAYS Been Traded Evenly or Up + Restrooms at the Trailhead + Laser Perfect Coordinates + Someting for the Kiddos + Whatever Else it Takes to Float Their Boat on that Particular Day.

Fortunately, most of us fall somewhere in the middle.

 

I wonder what the percentage of folks who will hunt anything and are happy about it would instantly drop that philosophy if smilies weren't involved.

[+Snoogans]

One end of the scale...

Geocaching=Hide + Seek (very uncomplicated)

...and the other.

But some folks neeeeed Geocaching to = Hide + Top Quality Large Container + Breathtaking Scenery + Exercise + Convenient Parking + Wonderful NEW Swag that has ALWAYS Been Traded Evenly or Up + Restrooms at the Trailhead + Laser Perfect Coordinates + Someting for the Kiddos + Whatever Else it Takes to Float Their Boat on that Particular Day.

Fortunately, most of us fall somewhere in the middle.

 

I wonder what the percentage of folks who will hunt anything and are happy about it would instantly drop that philosophy if smilies weren't involved.

 

Well then it would be like Joshua put it at the end of WarGames for some:

 

[tinny electronic voice] Strange game. The only way to win is not to play.[/voice]

 

It's a game CR.

 

For some folks the game is "get lots of smileys." With the smiley gone, their game greatly diminishes.

 

For me it's "Get caches on trips and color my map red. Get caches that have excellent word of mouth or good logs that appeal to my aesthetic. Oh, and attend EVERY event that I can." (98 events as of today.)

 

For others it's, "Get EVERY stinkin' cache I can before I die."

 

Who's doin' it wrong?

[CoyoteRed]

It's a game CR.

For some, yes. Maybe that's the problem.

 

Who's doin' it wrong?

Upon reflection, I think Groundspeak is doing it wrong.

 

You're right in that the hobby is different things to different folks. The problem isn't so much that other folks are doing it wrong, but the problem comes when one person's participation runs counter to another person's. Being able to separate that which I want to do from than which I don't want to do is really the issue. The filtering provided to us is not enough. Also, regardless of Groundspeak's assertions of geocaching is not a competition some folks continue to turn it into one and include me in it without my permission or desire.

 

Make it so I don't have to deal with other folks' "game" and I'd be able to enjoy more of my time geocaching.

[+KBI]

Who's doin' it wrong?

Nobody's doin' it wrong. Some people just can't accept the fact that some caches will always be more excitiong, more creative, more inspired, or simply more 'different' than others.

 

These lameness debates seem to always settle into two distinct factions: The Happy versus the Demanding. The Appreciative versus the Entitled. The Accepters versus the Whiners. The Tolerant versus the Intolerant.

 

Tolerant I can easily understand. What I will never understand is the intolerant/demanding/entitled point of view.

 

What is it about this hobby that leads some people to expect never to be disappointed? Don’t they know where caches come from? Don’t they understand the meaning of terms like "amateur" and "grass roots?"

 

I’ll never understand what drives some folks to complain about occasional lameness or to believe they are somehow entitled to more than the enormous volume and variety of entertainment they already receive for free. If someone puts out a hide-n-seek container for others to try and find I am free to either enjoy it or to bypass it. I’d be too ashamed to even consider actually complaining out loud that such free entertainment failed to adequately amuse me. If my expectations were unreasonably high, then who's fault is that?

 

Listing "lamest caches you've found" is kinda mean, but in a way it’s also kinda fun. Uninspired efforts will always exist, and sometimes they’re good for a laugh. For the most part this is a good thread.

 

Demanding, however, that fellow cachers should do a better job of providing you with free entertainment is unrealistic, pathetic, impractical and sad – in a word, "lame" – and demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the amateur nature of Geocaching.

[+TrailGators]

I'll never understand what drives some folks to complain about occasional lameness or to believe they are somehow entitled to more than the enormous volume and variety of entertainment they already receive for free.

Maybe you'd understand if you asked yourself what drives you to complain about them every chance you get? Why can't everyone just be allowed to share their opinions in the same way that all types of caches that meet the guidelines are permitted to exist? Are you "entitled" to threads that only discuss opinions that you agree with? Dude, it sure seems like you don't practice what you preach....

[+TrailGators]

The filtering provided to us is not enough.

CR, there are some new features coming out with Version 2 on Jan 7th that will help! I can't find the link but mtn-man was the one that told us about them!

[+KBI]

I'll never understand what drives some folks to complain about occasional lameness or to believe they are somehow entitled to more than the enormous volume and variety of entertainment they already receive for free.

Maybe you'd understand if you asked yourself what drives you to complain about them every chance you get?

Huh? When have I complained about occasional lame caches? When have I claimed to be entitled to more than the enormous volume and variety of entertainment I already receive for free? I think you've got me confused with someone else.

 

Why can't everyone just be allowed to share their opinions in the same way that all types of caches that meet the guidelines are permitted to exist?

Um ... last time I checked, everyone IS allowed to share their opinions. Did someone say otherwise?

 

Are you "entitled" to threads that only discuss opinions that you agree with?

Not that I'm aware. Did I say I was? Where did you hear such a silly thing?

 

Dude, it sure seems like you don't practice what you preach....

Funny how you never seem to lay into people like this with irrelevant noise when they say things you agree with -- only when you happen to disagree.

 

My comments were not directed at you, TG, yet you're sounding mighty defensive here. Does this mean you consider yourself to be one of the intolerant/demanding/entitled whiners I mentioned?

[+TrailGators]

I'll never understand what drives some folks to complain about occasional lameness or to believe they are somehow entitled to more than the enormous volume and variety of entertainment they already receive for free.

Maybe you'd understand if you asked yourself what drives you to complain about them every chance you get?

Huh? When have I complained about occasional lame caches? When have I claimed to be entitled to more than the enormous volume and variety of entertainment I already receive for free? I think you've got me confused with someone else.

You misinterpreted what I said. When I said "them," I meant the people that are not happy with lame caches. The point I was making is why don't you just leave these people alone? Let them gripe, it's no sweat off your back. They are just letting off some steam, which is healthy. The way I figure it, as long as there are lame caches there will be people griping about them. They are not hurting anyone, so they should be free to gripe just like people are free to hide lame caches. Right? Edited December 1, 2007 by TrailGators