Anyone else have a problem with Micro's

[+KBI]

I have a problem with caches in mundane or unappealing locations. It's just that most of them happen to be micros.

 

Yeah, yeah, I know. If you don't like 'em, don't hunt 'em, but I don't know that it's a crappy cache until I get there. I've reached a cache and realized what I was in for and turned around many times, which is a waste of my time and gas.

Sounds familiar ...

 

I have done a micro or two, and frankly find them pretty boring.

If only there were a way to avoid micros, to filter them out, so that you'd never have to SEE any of the cache pages, that way you wouldn't ever have to hunt them ...

If only there were a way to find out if a cache was good, regardless of it's size ...

If only there were a way to participate in an amateur, all-volunteer hobby without expecting never to be disappointed ...

[+KBI]

Frankly, I'm not moved to take action when someone pops in and states that he/she doesn't like finding certain caches and goes on to explain that he/she isn't willing to do anything to avoid them. The phrase 'boo hoo' comes to mind.

 

If someone didn't like a certain subset of caches and are making every effort to avoid them, but their fun is still being ruined, I might make a few suggestions to help them out.

 

"I hate these caches" combined with "I just dump all the caches to my GPSr and head out the door" does nothing to raise my sympathy level.

 

"Everyone should change to please me" is not a call to battle that I will ever support.

That just about sums it up for me. Couldn’t have said it better myself. Lord knows I’ve tried.

 

I hereby nominate sbell111 for the Clear and Concise Award!

[Neos2]

Apparently my only problem with micros is that I just can't find enough of them. I've said in these forums, many times, that "I don't mind micros" in fact I usually enjoy them just fine. Very seldomly am I completely disappointed with any cache I do.

 

I recently ran my stats... 65% of the caches I have found are outright micros. That number probably goes up slightly if you include the multis and mysteries and puzzles that had micros as components of the hunt.

 

So two thirds of the caches I've found were micros and I'm still having fun.

 

I "blame it" on the fact that I read the cache page and look for caches that I will enjoy.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Actually, the sky IS falling! After three and a half years of geocaching, I have started ignoring some micros! (21% of my finds have been micros.) Mind you, I have found some very good micros! And I've hidden some that I think are very good. And there are some areas where most caches are micros. (NYC, for example.) But, as many have said, it's not the size of your cache, but how you use it.

I travel, with some frequency, through a fairly pretty area, with some nice parks. I have found the two at the rest area, the two at Wally World, the one at the Home Depot and the one at the Best Western. Only one was memorable. The ones in the parks, while still micros, were more interesting. On my last trip through the area, there was a new cache hidden in the parking lot of a store that I visit. I ignored it, in favor of going benchmarking instead! Yeah. A cheap, easy, boring, meaningless micro, and I ignored it. The sky is falling.

[4wheelin_fool]

Not a single Micro when I started here, but now they are everywhere. Whats the deal? Gas stations, quicky marts, Starbucks, I hate them and refuse go after them. Lets get back to real geocaching and real cache containers!

 

SHHH! They will try to silence you ! If you openly print "I do not like micros" you will attract and incur the wrath of the micro-protectors. Please try to bear your pain silently.

[+KBI]

Not a single Micro when I started here, but now they are everywhere. Whats the deal? Gas stations, quicky marts, Starbucks, I hate them and refuse go after them. Lets get back to real geocaching and real cache containers!

SHHH! They will try to silence you ! If you openly print "I do not like micros" you will attract and incur the wrath of the micro-protectors. Please try to bear your pain silently.

Has someone tried to silence your opinion, 4wheelin_fool?

 

Who has challenged your right to express your opinion? Who has challenged anyone's right to express an opinion in these forums?

 

Just let me know who these mindlessly insecure bullies are, and I'll go beat 'em up for ya.

[4wheelin_fool]

Not a single Micro when I started here, but now they are everywhere. Whats the deal? Gas stations, quicky marts, Starbucks, I hate them and refuse go after them. Lets get back to real geocaching and real cache containers!

SHHH! They will try to silence you ! If you openly print "I do not like micros" you will attract and incur the wrath of the micro-protectors. Please try to bear your pain silently.

Has someone tried to silence your opinion, 4wheelin_fool?

 

Who has challenged your right to express your opinion? Who has challenged anyone's right to express an opinion in these forums?

 

Just let me know who these mindlessly insecure bullies are, and I'll go beat 'em up for ya.

 

Great ! Thanks KBI !

[+Okiebryan]

Not a single Micro when I started here, but now they are everywhere. Whats the deal? Gas stations, quicky marts, Starbucks, I hate them and refuse go after them. Lets get back to real geocaching and real cache containers!

SHHH! They will try to silence you ! If you openly print "I do not like micros" you will attract and incur the wrath of the micro-protectors. Please try to bear your pain silently.

Has someone tried to silence your opinion, 4wheelin_fool?

 

Who has challenged your right to express your opinion? Who has challenged anyone's right to express an opinion in these forums?

 

Just let me know who these mindlessly insecure bullies are, and I'll go beat 'em up for ya.

That would be me...

 

Edited January 26, 2008 by Okiebryan

[Trinity's Crew]

Yeah, I know this whine of mine is getting old. But maybe a few people will read my posts and realize that not everybody is absolutely thrilled with their film canister hidden behind the strip mall dumpster, and try to make their next hides more memorable. If that happens, then my rant will have its intended result.

 

I don't think anybody here will say that more memorable caches are a bad thing .

I don't think many people set out to hide a BAD cache. There will always be caches that you dislike but that doesn't make them inherently bad.

And could someone point me to a few examples of caches hidden in or on dumpsters? I see dumpster caches discussed a LOT but I can't believe there are many out there.

 

P.S. I let my membership run out! That really fries my eggs! I just fixed it.

Edited January 26, 2008 by Trinity's Crew

[+KBI]

Not a single Micro when I started here, but now they are everywhere. Whats the deal? Gas stations, quicky marts, Starbucks, I hate them and refuse go after them. Lets get back to real geocaching and real cache containers!

SHHH! They will try to silence you ! If you openly print "I do not like micros" you will attract and incur the wrath of the micro-protectors. Please try to bear your pain silently.

Has someone tried to silence your opinion, 4wheelin_fool?

 

Who has challenged your right to express your opinion? Who has challenged anyone's right to express an opinion in these forums?

 

Just let me know who these mindlessly insecure bullies are, and I'll go beat 'em up for ya.

 

Great ! Thanks KBI !

You forgot to tell me who. I can't defend your honor until you tell me who these yay-hoos are.

[+briansnat]

And could someone point me to a few examples of caches hidden in or on dumpsters? I see dumpster caches discussed a LOT but I can't believe there are many out there.

 

I can't. When my GPS starts pointing toward the dumpster area, I turn around. I've done this more than a few times.

[+nptrash]

micros are caches and by being a cache it becomes just another reason to get off the couch and into the sunlight(or moonlight if you swing that way).

[kc0ubz]

Okay, just to add insult to everyone's injury...

 

I love micro's. In my area, we have some pretty good hides, a lot original, and some I have yet to fine.

 

Anyways, I have a new idea (Although it's probably already been thought of/done in another area,) and will be placing it in February.

 

Now the insult? I think I'm gonna actually name the cache "I Hate Micro's" (Nope, I'm not joking.)

Edited January 26, 2008 by kc0ubz

[+GrateBear]

So why don't you just ignore them? Why vent your feelings on everyone else? Personally, I don't like finding large caches that have a bunch of crap in them that many consider "swag". 99% of that stuff is crap in my mind. Does someone think I'll be excited about finding a key chain from the company they work for that no one has ever heard of?

Get over it.

[Mushtang]

Okay, just to add insult to everyone's injury...

 

I love micro's. In my area, we have some pretty good hides, a lot original, and some I have yet to fine.

 

Anyways, I have a new idea (Although it's probably already been thought of/done in another area,) and will be placing it in February.

 

Now the insult? I think I'm gonna actually name the cache "I Hate Micro's" (Nope, I'm not joking.)

Yup, you're right. It's been done.

[+3 Hawks]

I dislike spinich, tofu, and eggplant. Therefore, I don't eat spinich, tofu, or eggplant. Those who like the stuff can have all of it they want. Then again, maybe I've just not been exposed to the proper preparation and/or presentation of these items. Luckily, there is enough variety of other items available to keep me healthy and happy.

 

But what happens when the local stores and restaurants start selling nothing but spinach, tofu, and eggplant and you can't just go to the grocery store anymore to get the food you like? Instead you have spend hours researching grocery stores and drive miles out of your way to find a steak.

 

I'm from the land of Edward Theodore Gein. I'll just let the steak drive to me.

[kc0ubz]

Okay, just to add insult to everyone's injury...

 

I love micro's. In my area, we have some pretty good hides, a lot original, and some I have yet to fine.

 

Anyways, I have a new idea (Although it's probably already been thought of/done in another area,) and will be placing it in February.

 

Now the insult? I think I'm gonna actually name the cache "I Hate Micro's" (Nope, I'm not joking.)

Yup, you're right. It's been done.

 

I guess I should clarify. I wasn't talking about the cache name being already done, just the method of hiding it.

[kc0ubz]

Okay, just to add insult to everyone's injury...

 

I love micro's. In my area, we have some pretty good hides, a lot original, and some I have yet to fine.

 

Anyways, I have a new idea (Although it's probably already been thought of/done in another area,) and will be placing it in February.

 

Now the insult? I think I'm gonna actually name the cache "I Hate Micro's" (Nope, I'm not joking.)

Yup, you're right. It's been done.

 

Good lord...that's a lot...

[Mr.Yuck]

Yeah, I know this whine of mine is getting old. But maybe a few people will read my posts and realize that not everybody is absolutely thrilled with their film canister hidden behind the strip mall dumpster, and try to make their next hides more memorable. If that happens, then my rant will have its intended result.

 

I don't think anybody here will say that more memorable caches are a bad thing .

I don't think many people set out to hide a BAD cache. There will always be caches that you dislike but that doesn't make them inherently bad.

And could someone point me to a few examples of caches hidden in or on dumpsters? I see dumpster caches discussed a LOT but I can't believe there are many out there.

 

P.S. I let my membership run out! That really fries my eggs! I just fixed it.

 

Ya know, I think I asked that once before, if there were any caches actually on the dumpster. But that would be kind of a static location, and I can imagine the slamming of the dumpster back on the ground after emptying would dislodge most magnetic attachments. Now, near the dumpster, I'm sure plenty, depending on how you define "near".

 

Yes, Trinity's I see you're once again listed as Premium member, but you've lost your forum title. That's a strange little bug in the system that will take several days to work out.

 

EDIT: The owner will probably kill me if he see's this, but This cache, which I once stopped to let someone find, but didn't log myself, is about 15 feet from a KFC dumpster.

Edited January 26, 2008 by TheWhiteUrkel

[Trinity's Crew]

Yeah, I know this whine of mine is getting old. But maybe a few people will read my posts and realize that not everybody is absolutely thrilled with their film canister hidden behind the strip mall dumpster, and try to make their next hides more memorable. If that happens, then my rant will have its intended result.

 

I don't think anybody here will say that more memorable caches are a bad thing .

I don't think many people set out to hide a BAD cache. There will always be caches that you dislike but that doesn't make them inherently bad.

And could someone point me to a few examples of caches hidden in or on dumpsters? I see dumpster caches discussed a LOT but I can't believe there are many out there.

 

P.S. I let my membership run out! That really fries my eggs! I just fixed it.

 

Ya know, I think I asked that once before, if there were any caches actually on the dumpster. But that would be kind of a static location, and I can imagine the slamming of the dumpster back on the ground after emptying would dislodge most magnetic attachments. Now, near the dumpster, I'm sure plenty, depending on how you define "near".

 

Yes, Trinity's I see you're once again listed as Premium member, but you've lost your forum title. That's a strange little bug in the system that will take several days to work out.

I guess what I'm really asking is...

Show me some caches where the only obvious intent is/was to make you commune with a dumpster.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I don't think many people set out to hide a BAD cache. There will always be caches that you dislike but that doesn't make them inherently bad.

And could someone point me to a few examples of caches hidden in or on dumpsters? I see dumpster caches discussed a LOT but I can't believe there are many out there.

 

I could, but the owner is reconsidering the hide after I logged my DNF "Why did you want to bring people here?" I doubt that it is actually on a dumpster, but it is very near a few.

[CoyoteRed]

Not a single Micro when I started here, but now they are everywhere. Whats the deal? Gas stations, quicky marts, Starbucks, I hate them and refuse go after them. Lets get back to real geocaching and real cache containers!

Unfortunately, it's not just micros. It's basically caches with little thought or purposes other than actually having a good time finding logging the cache.

 

It's not as if you can filter on "micro" as some cache owners are deliberately listing them as the wrong size or choosing to list as "unknown." I'm seeing this in some of my PQs when some earlier dated PQ actually grow. These "new" caches that were placed well in the past are now "unknown." I filter out micros, virts, and "other" in some of my PQs. Are these new "unknown" caches being changed from "other" or are they being changed from micro? Don't know why one would switch from "other" to "not listed" on the drop down list while editing the cache page.

 

Because of this I now have to filter out caches that are not listed as small, regular or large. Now the micros have to be intentionally mis-categorized in order to make it through.

 

(Sure, it's a bit of a conspiracy theory, but...)

 

Anyway, it's not just micros. It's that this level of geocaching is mostly micros. It's unfortunate as we now tend to filter out micros both from our downloads and on the fly thus missing some nice caches.

Edited January 26, 2008 by CoyoteRed

[Mushtang]

Not a single Micro when I started here, but now they are everywhere. Whats the deal? Gas stations, quicky marts, Starbucks, I hate them and refuse go after them. Lets get back to real geocaching and real cache containers!

Unfortunately, it's not just micros. It's basically caches with little thought or purposes other than actually having a good time finding the cache.

 

It's not as if you can filter on "micro" as some cache owners are deliberately listing them as the wrong size or choosing to list as "unknown." I'm seeing this in some of my PQs when some earlier dated PQ actually grow. These "new" caches that were placed well in the past are now "unknown." I filter out micros, virts, and "other" in some of my PQs. Are these new "unknown" caches being changed from "other" or are they being changed from micro? Don't know why one would switch from "other" to "not listed" on the drop down list while editing the cache page.

 

Because of this I now have to filter out caches that are not listed as small, regular or large. Now the micros have to be intentionally mis-categorized in order to make it through.

 

(Sure, it's a bit of a conspiracy theory, but...)

 

Anyway, it's not just micros. It's that this level of geocaching is mostly micros. It's unfortunate as we now tend to filter out micros both from our downloads and on the fly thus missing some nice caches.

Hey CoyoteRed, I have two questions for you.

 

And keep in mind these are serious questions, no smart-alek replies coming, no nefarious intentions at all. Honest.

 

Now that you're filtering your PQs as you've mentioned above (and admittedly you're missing out on some caches you'd probably enjoy), have you found that the percentage of caches CoyoteRed and the Mrs. enjoys has gone way up in your PQs? And are you having a much better experience caching using those filters than without?

[+Team Cotati]

Hey Coyote! Don't do it.

[+KBI]

Not a single Micro when I started here, but now they are everywhere. Whats the deal? Gas stations, quicky marts, Starbucks, I hate them and refuse go after them. Lets get back to real geocaching and real cache containers!

Unfortunately, it's not just micros. It's basically caches with little thought or purposes other than actually having a good time finding the cache.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

 

Do I understand you correctly? Do you really, honestly think it is bad – or as you say, "unfortunate" – that people are in fact enjoying caches for no other reason than because they are having a good time finding them?

[CoyoteRed]

Now that you're filtering your PQs as you've mentioned above (and admittedly you're missing out on some caches you'd probably enjoy), have you found that the percentage of caches CoyoteRed and the Mrs. enjoys has gone way up in your PQs? And are you having a much better experience caching using those filters than without?

If you're comparing PQs with micros and those without, in today's environment, I'd say the PQs without micros have a higher percentage of higher quality caches. Comparing experiences with micros and without, all things being equal and in today's environment, then without the micros is a higher quality experience.

 

However, we also tend to concentrate on higher difficulty caches, hiking caches, and recommended caches. What is gone in today's caching experiences as compared to when we first started and included everything in our lists is the smaller, out of the way places that might have really only supported a micro. We also tend to stay away from urbans, unless recommended, yet before, few were such that we felt had wasted our time.

 

Removing micros from our PQs, notably from areas that are a distance from home, does increase the likelihood of having a better experience, but does not take us back to the same, high quality experiences we enjoyed previously.

 

Unfortunately, filtering micros doesn't really address the problem overall. Many a fine quality cache that happens to be a micro suffers from guilt through association. When the quality of a critical mass of micros--whatever that may be--starts to get such that folks start to ignore them automatically then the whole size category suffers. Many a nice micro goes unfound by those who would have otherwise enjoyed it. Do the filterers miss out? Sure, but they have to make a choice of wasting their time wading through lame micro after lame micro to find the gems. Why should they do that when enough other sized caches exist?

 

Also, the problem goes down the road similar to virtuals. Some folks might see micros as "good enough." Their cache gets found often enough to be "worth it" to them, yet they could have easily gotten more visits if they had bumped the size and put in trinkets. Now we have micros in parks that could have supported a larger cache and non-micro hunters don't get the pleasure of that hunt.

 

This is a two-edged sword, though. I've seen plenty of lame micro placements that could have supported a larger container, yet the bump in size would not have increased the experience significantly enough to make it worth it. I've seen enough LPCs to know that most could support a container well into the small category. However, because folks who tend to place such caches will use a micro those get filtered out, fortunately.

 

Yes, caching has changed. Do I like it? Nope.

 

While some claim those of us who wish a higher percentage of quality caches existed are the entitlement crowd, I think it's the ones who demand more and more caches to find, at any cost, fit the definition instead. The demand for more caches to find so they can reach some arbitrary goal, to find that cache first, to be able to log a cache with minimal effort regardless of the circumstances are the entitlement crowd. They feel they are entitled to that smilie regardless.

[CoyoteRed]

Do I understand you correctly?

You did understand what I said properly, however, I misspoke. I meant logging the cache.

 

I'll blame it on an earlier caffeine deficient.

 

My philosophy is a cache should primarily be fun to find. It should stand on its own and be worth finding even if it is never logged online.

 

The problem, as I see it, comes from caches placed for the game of chasing the smilie. I fully recognize that is fun for some people, but it has little to do with caching itself. Finding a cache is only the excuse to increment the find count.

 

I think I would love it if Groundspeak would include waymarks in the find count. It would be so much easier for these folks to place, find, and log waymarks than having to actually deal with anything physical. The numbers could get massive, something I'm sure they would love. After a while the thrache would fall by the wayside leaving the geocaches folks are invested in keeping around.

[+sbell111]

And could someone point me to a few examples of caches hidden in or on dumpsters? I see dumpster caches discussed a LOT but I can't believe there are many out there.

 

I can't. When my GPS starts pointing toward the dumpster area, I turn around. I've done this more than a few times.

I can remember only one cache that I found near a dumpster, perhaps it's more common in some areas than others. I haven't cached in New Jersey. Perhaps these caches are common there.

 

.... Yes, caching has changed. Do I like it? Nope.

 

While some claim those of us who wish a higher percentage of quality caches existed are the entitlement crowd, I think it's the ones who demand more and more caches to find, at any cost, fit the definition instead. The demand for more caches to find so they can reach some arbitrary goal, to find that cache first, to be able to log a cache with minimal effort regardless of the circumstances are the entitlement crowd. They feel they are entitled to that smilie regardless.

I'm not at all sure that these wishes are due to feelings of entitlement. Rather, I think these wishes are due to both our inherent tendency to primarily remember just the best parts about the hobby and our reluctance to use all the tools at our disposal to maximize our fun. I think that Brian's posts regarding this topic point a light on both of these tendencies.

[+MountainMudbug]

I've practically stopped caching because there are just waaaaay too many around for me to find it exciting and special anymore. I used to go out on my own and drive for miles to get to that one new cache that suddenly popped up in the list. Now they pop up faster than a pimple on a greasy forehead.

Occasionally I'll feel the caching bug bite, but that is increasingly rare.

Too bad, so sad for me, but great for those who want to log 75 film cannisters on the way home from work.

[+joeteach]

Not a single Micro when I started here, but now they are everywhere. Whats the deal? Gas stations, quicky marts, Starbucks, I hate them and refuse go after them. Lets get back to real geocaching and real cache containers!

 

Unfortunately thast will require 10,000 brain transplants or tuition paid to a week at some "attitude adjustment" center. Unfortunately neither is going to happen, regardless of the black eye that such hide locations give the game. Far too many og the players see no problem with hiding and poking around utility boxes behind businesses or in the bushes in high traffic locations. Or scrouinging around in the landscaping in parks or commercial locations. Or in 'inspectiing' every bolt anf gasket cover on and around commercial ro community based fire fighting piping and its associated equiptment and on and on and on........

 

Eventually this going to cause major undesirable interactions between geocachers and property owners, their private security patrols and the gubmint taxpayer funded real type cops. Everyone sees it coming and for the most part they relish in the perverse excitment of the moment. To them it is comical.

 

Just stick around and watch.

 

I loved the Cartoon

Edited January 26, 2008 by joeteach

[Mushtang]

Yes, caching has changed. Do I like it? Nope.

Well, I'm happy that you've found a way to still enjoy geocaching enough to stay with it and you haven't left to start up www.sissycaching.com. The forums are more fun with you in here swinging along with us.

 

I totally agree that it's changed in the years that I've been caching. Definitely higher percentage of micros, higher percentage of quick finds, and lower percentage of caches that are more like the kind you describe as your preference.

 

However, I believe that the total number of the kinds you like are growing. Filtering out most of what you don't like and some of what you do like in order to more easily find the gems out of what's left is helping you. We could call it the "CR Method".

 

Another method I see used (that I shouldn't attach a name to in order not to get personal), is to complain about how things are, to constantly say how much better it used to be, and to suggest that other people change so that they can keep the good old days around. These people refuse to filter and would rather ask, "Why should I change the way I cache"? Complaining may get someone's point across, and may change a few hiders that read the forums, but it doesn't improve their caching experience nearly as much, or as quickly, as you did when you used the CR Method.

 

I'll probably point people to your post in the future when the Anti Lame Micro (or anti whatever) threads return again, and again, and again...

[+briansnat]

I can remember only one cache that I found near a dumpster, perhaps it's more common in some areas than others. I haven't cached in New Jersey. Perhaps these caches are common there.

 

Actually they aren't. Caching is still lthankfully old school here, though some newbs in the past few months have gotten the strip mall bug.

[+KBI]

Do I understand you correctly?

You did understand what I said properly, however, I misspoke. I meant logging the cache.

 

I'll blame it on an earlier caffeine deficient.

If that’s what you meant, then what exactly, in your view, is inherently wrong with the enjoyment of logging a cache? I usually enjoy logging my finds online, I usually enjoy reading others' logs, and I sometimes enjoy watching my (and my friends') numbers increase. Am I inherently bad because I enjoy those things? Does my enjoyment cause you harm?

 

My philosophy is a cache should primarily be fun to find. It should stand on its own and be worth finding even if it is never logged online.

Then that is the type of cache you should place, and that is the type of cache you should seek. No reason to disparage others for having a different preference. No reason to tell others their preference is any less proper or correct than yours.

 

The problem, as I see it, comes from caches placed for the game of chasing the smilie. I fully recognize that is fun for some people, but it has little to do with caching itself.

... in your opinion.

 

I respect your opinion, but in my opinion using a GPS and finding caches while earning smilies is in fact the very essence of caching itself.

 

You sound as if maybe you prefer creativity, a nice view, historical interest or some other form of pizzazz over a bland, simple hide. I generally share that preference, but none of those things is a requirement for me to be able to enjoy a cache hunt. The mere act of finding a thing the muggles don’t know about while using my GPS is usually plenty enough for me, as I suspect is the case with many folks ... and that has very little to do with running up find counts.

 

Besides, competition among cachers for the highest find count is a perfectly valid way to enjoy the game. Nobody says you or I have to participate in the competition.

 

The problem, as I see it, comes from people allowing themselves to be unnecessarily disappointed while participating in an open, grass-root, volunteer pastime which is run solely by amateurs – and then complaining in the forums that they have chosen to allow themselves to be unnecessarily disappointed. I fully recognize that is fun for some people, but it has little to do with caching itself.

 

Finding a cache is only the excuse to increment the find count.

I think you are making a risky assumption regarding the reasons people hide and/or seek the kinds of caches you dislike.

 

When people set out to run up their find count I suppose it’s possible their number is the ONLY thing that matters to them, but I doubt it. If it were, then there are much more efficient ways to maximize the number than by actually finding caches and signing paper logs. Sure, there are a rare few people who cheat or who target only the easiest and quickest finds, but I haven’t observed that to be the case.

 

I think I would love it if Groundspeak would include waymarks in the find count. It would be so much easier for these folks to place, find, and log waymarks than having to actually deal with anything physical. The numbers could get massive, something I'm sure they would love. After a while the thrache would fall by the wayside leaving the geocaches folks are invested in keeping around.

That’s not a bad idea. I wouldn’t be opposed, but let me ask you this: Wouldn't that effectively be the same thing as bringing back virtual caches? What would be the significant difference? Was the number of caches you dislike decreasing back when new virtual caches were still being listed?

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

And BTW: Thanks in advance for no longer calling me a troll, now or in the future. In exchange I promise I will continue to never give you any reason to do so. The mods have made it clear they are not interested in policing bad-faith debating tactics (such as when you accused me of being disingenuous). It’s up to us to play nice – and I’m sure I won’t be disappointed.

[+ReadyOrNot]

Why do we continue arguing about this, knowing that cache rewards are coming? Sometimes I think that everyone just enjoys arguing about this topic. This argument will soon become moot with the introduction of the cache "rewards" rating system.

 

Would you hunt a micro rewarded with "One of a kind"? or "Fantastic View"? Let's drop this stupid argument once and for all.. Everyone is a winner (or loser depending on your perspective)

[+KBI]

While some claim those of us who wish a higher percentage of quality caches existed are the entitlement crowd, I think it's the ones who demand more and more caches to find, at any cost, fit the definition instead. The demand for more caches to find so they can reach some arbitrary goal, to find that cache first, to be able to log a cache with minimal effort regardless of the circumstances are the entitlement crowd. They feel they are entitled to that smilie regardless.

I disagree completely.

 

I have not observed the demands you hypothesize, only excitement and enjoyment.

 

When the people who enjoy finding lots of caches look around and see too few caches, they simply hide more caches. I have seen no demand threads in the forums complaining about too few easy caches to find.

 

When the entitlement crowd, however, looks around and sees too few of the "correctly designed" caches to which they feel they are entitled, some go out and hide more of what they enjoy – while others go into the forums and complain. I have seen dozens and dozens of demand threads complaining about there being too many of the caches which tend to be enjoyed by the first group, and too few of the caches which comply with the entitlement crowd's more "proper" preferences.

[+KBI]

I've practically stopped caching because there are just waaaaay too many around for me to find it exciting and special anymore. I used to go out on my own and drive for miles to get to that one new cache that suddenly popped up in the list. Now they pop up faster than a pimple on a greasy forehead.

When you drive for miles to get to that one exciting and special new cache that suddenly popped up in the list, does it make the find less enjoyable for you to know that you are driving past lots of other caches to get there? I don't understand.

[Rostropovich]

Since it seems a large amount of Geocachers find ill placed micros annoying, then why don't we all Hide the types of caches that we would like to find

[+MountainMudbug]

I've practically stopped caching because there are just waaaaay too many around for me to find it exciting and special anymore. I used to go out on my own and drive for miles to get to that one new cache that suddenly popped up in the list. Now they pop up faster than a pimple on a greasy forehead.

When you drive for miles to get to that one exciting and special new cache that suddenly popped up in the list, does it make the find less enjoyable for you to know that you are driving past lots of other caches to get there? I don't understand.

 

You misunderstood my point - it was a more special, exciting experience for me when caches were few and far between. Now that I can drive by a cache every 1000 feet, it is less exciting (regardless of the container).

The novelty of caching has worn off due to time and overpopulation of caches, and a great percentage of this population is hasty micro.

 

Those are my eyes, yours may vary.

Edited January 26, 2008 by MountainMudbug

[Mushtang]

Why do we continue arguing about this, knowing that cache rewards are coming?

Why do you keep reading threads with these debates, knowing the content is something you're not going to want to read?

 

Sometimes I think that everyone just enjoys arguing about this topic.

I know I do, I've learned quite a few things in these discussions! When they get to the point I'm no longer enjoying being in them, I no longer open them.

 

Let's drop this stupid argument once and for all.

Instead of continually telling us to stop arguing about things because the rewards are coming (this is not your first time), why don't you just let us have the discussion and either join in or keep lurking. BTW, posting off topic comments suggesting we stop the conversation isn't joining in.

[+ReadyOrNot]

Why do we continue arguing about this, knowing that cache rewards are coming?

Why do you keep reading threads with these debates, knowing the content is something you're not going to want to read?

 

Sometimes I think that everyone just enjoys arguing about this topic.

I know I do, I've learned quite a few things in these discussions! When they get to the point I'm no longer enjoying being in them, I no longer open them.

 

Let's drop this stupid argument once and for all.

Instead of continually telling us to stop arguing about things because the rewards are coming (this is not your first time), why don't you just let us have the discussion and either join in or keep lurking. BTW, posting off topic comments suggesting we stop the conversation isn't joining in.

 

The fact that a rewards system is coming is DIRECTLY related to this topic. You responding to my post telling me to butt out of the conversation is OFF TOPIC. You are correct, this isn't the first time and it won't be the last.

 

Topic - Complaining that lame micros are lame. Side 1: Don't hunt them if they are lame... Side 2: There's not a good way of knowing if they are lame or not... Side 1: Just filter out all micros and don't hunt them at all.... Side 2: But some micros are good, not all of them are bad.... Side 1: Read through the logs to figure out which ones are lame or not.... Side 2: You smell! Side 1: No, you smell!!

 

ANSWER: Cache ratings system... Could it be any more on topic Mus*tang?

Edited January 26, 2008 by ReadyOrNot

[Rostropovich]

What is this caching rewards system and when is it coming?

[Mushtang]

Why do we continue arguing about this, knowing that cache rewards are coming?

Why do you keep reading threads with these debates, knowing the content is something you're not going to want to read?

 

Sometimes I think that everyone just enjoys arguing about this topic.

I know I do, I've learned quite a few things in these discussions! When they get to the point I'm no longer enjoying being in them, I no longer open them.

 

Let's drop this stupid argument once and for all.

Instead of continually telling us to stop arguing about things because the rewards are coming (this is not your first time), why don't you just let us have the discussion and either join in or keep lurking. BTW, posting off topic comments suggesting we stop the conversation isn't joining in.

 

The fact that a rewards system is coming is DIRECTLY related to this topic. You responding to my post telling me to butt out of the conversation is OFF TOPIC. You are correct, this isn't the first time and it won't be the last.

 

Topic - Complaining that lame micros are lame. Side 1: Don't hunt them if they are lame... Side 2: There's not a good way of knowing if they are lame or not... Side 1: Just filter out all micros and don't hunt them at all.... Side 2: But some micros are good, not all of them are bad.... Side 1: Read through the logs to figure out which ones are lame or not.... Side 2: You smell! Side 1: No, you smell!!

 

ANSWER: Cache ratings system... Could it be any more on topic Mus*tang?

Which of the two bold statements above is closer to telling anyone to stop talking? Never once did I say you should butt out.

 

Discussing the cache ratings system and how it can help when it arrives is on topic.

 

Bringing up the cache ratings system as a reason we should "drop the stupid argument once and for all" is off topic.

 

So again I'll say to you, Ready Or Not, if you've got something on topic to add, please join in. If you're just going to come in and tell us all to drop it and stop the discussion, we'd appreciate it if you wouldn't. If you'd like to get a mod to made a ruling as to which one of us is correct, please report my post.

 

Back to the topic: The future cache ratings system may or may not help when it does arrive, but when that will happen is anyone's guess, and the filters suggested above are a great way to improve your cache experience in the mean time.

[+TeamGumbo]

What is this caching rewards system and when is it coming?

 

It's where people get to tell other people how much they hate micros.

 

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

 

We now return to our regular topic.

[+KBI]

I've practically stopped caching because there are just waaaaay too many around for me to find it exciting and special anymore. I used to go out on my own and drive for miles to get to that one new cache that suddenly popped up in the list. Now they pop up faster than a pimple on a greasy forehead.

When you drive for miles to get to that one exciting and special new cache that suddenly popped up in the list, does it make the find less enjoyable for you to know that you are driving past lots of other caches to get there? I don't understand.

You misunderstood my point - it was a more special, exciting experience for me when caches were few and far between. Now that I can drive by a cache every 1000 feet, it is less exciting (regardless of the container).

The novelty of caching has worn off due to time and overpopulation of caches, and a great percentage of this population is hasty micro.

 

Those are my eyes, yours may vary.

So: You hear of a new cache in a cool place several miles away. You get the coords, program your GPS, grab your caching pack and go hunt (and hopefully find) the cache. You’re saying that hunt would be less fun for you because of a few hundred other published hidden containers that happen to be located in places you didn’t search? How is that?

 

If your enjoyment of caching is diminished by the fact that there are lots more caches available to hunt nowadays, then I must say I pity you for that point of view, but I still don’t understand why container size is relevant.

 

If it’s micros you dislike, then you’re in luck: Micros are frighteningly easy to avoid.

 

If it’s strictly novelty you desire, then maybe Geocaching has outgrown you. Maybe it’s time for you to find a much newer and much more obscure hobby. Maybe you could invent one.

 

The only other solution I see would be to somehow actively modify the entire hobby, and take the back to what it was at the time you enjoyed it most. That would require the forced removal of most of the existing participants from the game. This raises two questions:

(1) Should it be done?

Is it right to not only pull up the ladder to new participants, but to invite all members who have joined since August of ’02 to beat it?

 

(2) Can it be done?

How are you going to accomplish this reversion? Even if you could somehow convince all those folks to voluntarily renounce their Groundspeak accounts and go away (or convince Groundspeak to forcibly eject them), then isn’t the cat already out of the bag? All those freshly excommunicated people will still know about the fun of hunting hidden containers with GPS. What do you think they’ll do next? Will driving by a cache every 1000 feet still bother you as much when those caches are listed on another site? If not, then why not just accomplish that effect right now, the easy way, and filter out whatever you don't like without all the fuss of revolution?

I must be honest and say your point of view sounds mighty selfish. I am truly sorry for you that you are apparently unable to enjoy the hobby as much as I do.

[CoyoteRed]

I think you are making a risky assumption regarding the reasons people hide and/or seek the kinds of caches you dislike.

There was no assumption when I was told by someone the reason he placed a few caches. Nor is it an assumption when I'm reading the reason for a cache in the cache description. Where do you think I got the term "gift" and the association from? It wasn't from an discussion here in the forum.

 

Wouldn't that effectively be the same thing as bringing back virtual caches?

Pretty much, but with an important difference. The word or root of "cache" will not be attached so land stewards will be a lot less likely to confuse the physical and the non-physical.

 

Was the number of caches you dislike decreasing back when new virtual caches were still being listed?

No, you're confused on the time line. The percentages of caches I feel were not worth my time was still low when virts were being listed easily. These started to rise as virts submissions were limited and stopped.

[+MountainMudbug]

I've practically stopped caching because there are just waaaaay too many around for me to find it exciting and special anymore. I used to go out on my own and drive for miles to get to that one new cache that suddenly popped up in the list. Now they pop up faster than a pimple on a greasy forehead.

When you drive for miles to get to that one exciting and special new cache that suddenly popped up in the list, does it make the find less enjoyable for you to know that you are driving past lots of other caches to get there? I don't understand.

You misunderstood my point - it was a more special, exciting experience for me when caches were few and far between. Now that I can drive by a cache every 1000 feet, it is less exciting (regardless of the container).

The novelty of caching has worn off due to time and overpopulation of caches, and a great percentage of this population is hasty micro.

 

Those are my eyes, yours may vary.

So: You hear of a new cache in a cool place several miles away. You get the coords, program your GPS, grab your caching pack and go hunt (and hopefully find) the cache. You’re saying that hunt would be less fun for you because of a few hundred other published hidden containers that happen to be located in places you didn’t search? How is that?

 

If your enjoyment of caching is diminished by the fact that there are lots more caches available to hunt nowadays, then I must say I pity you for that point of view, but I still don’t understand why container size is relevant.

 

If it’s micros you dislike, then you’re in luck: Micros are frighteningly easy to avoid.

 

If it’s strictly novelty you desire, then maybe Geocaching has outgrown you. Maybe it’s time for you to find a much newer and much more obscure hobby. Maybe you could invent one.

 

The only other solution I see would be to somehow actively modify the entire hobby, and take the back to what it was at the time you enjoyed it most. That would require the forced removal of most of the existing participants from the game. This raises two questions:

(1) Should it be done?

Is it right to not only pull up the ladder to new participants, but to invite all members who have joined since August of ’02 to beat it?

 

(2) Can it be done?

How are you going to accomplish this reversion? Even if you could somehow convince all those folks to voluntarily renounce their Groundspeak accounts and go away (or convince Groundspeak to forcibly eject them), then isn’t the cat already out of the bag? All those freshly excommunicated people will still know about the fun of hunting hidden containers with GPS. What do you think they’ll do next? Will driving by a cache every 1000 feet still bother you as much when those caches are listed on another site? If not, then why not just accomplish that effect right now, the easy way, and filter out whatever you don't like without all the fuss of revolution?

I must be honest and say your point of view sounds mighty selfish. I am truly sorry for you that you are apparently unable to enjoy the hobby as much as I do.

 

Let me know the date you plan to throw my pity party and I'll be there.

I never said scorch and burn all the micros. I was indicating that there are others who share the feeling that micros are annoying. I still sometimes find them. I still own one.

But, since I do not express myself properly or you choose not to view my posts as my personal opinions and rather as me making a a blanket statement that the whole sport sucks now and needs to eliminate micros or I'll just split the scene, I will bow out.

Sorry you spent so much time disecting my comments - that is all they are, my views and feelings on the state of the game as I currently (have for some time) see it. Glad you're still rolling in blissfull glee when you cache.

 

It is healthy for me to return to the forums occasionally - just takes a couple posts and I'm reminded why I usually stay away.

Thanks!

Edited January 26, 2008 by MountainMudbug

[+Trucker Lee]

Micros have their place, but I do think sometimes that a larger container could have been used when I find some of them. Still, I am not happy hunting a micro next to a dumpster.

[+Team Cotati]

What's the reward for hiding a POC micro on a power transformer behind the China Palace restaurant?

Edited January 26, 2008 by Team Cotati

[+egami]

What's the reward for hiding a POC micro on a power transformer behind the China Palace restaurant?

 

Getting your fortune?