giving back to the hobby

[+Random Acts]

In the logs we receive from our caches, I am constantly dismayed to see so many cachers who have find numbers in the 4-digits and placed (owned) caches in the single digits. While I admire their dedication to the hobby, it strikes me that these people are getting much from it, but putting almost nothing back.

 

We have placed a fair number of caches in our moderately active career in caching. At present we have something like 29 caches owned and finds of 390. That would be a proportion of approx. 7%. I.e., 7 caches placed for every 100 found. At one time we had proposed on this forum that a ratio of 10:1 would be appropriate. For that we received a considerable amount of opprobrium. Why?

 

It seems reasonable that, if people are deriving enjoyment, fulfillment, entertainment, or whatever, from Geocaching, they should put something into it in return. To look at a recent (and typical) log on one of our caches, the cachers had finds of approximately 1400 and placed caches of 3. That's .2 percent.

 

Everyone likes to find caches. If everyone wants to find them but not so many are interested in placing them, where does that leave cachers and the hobby in general? In our times of lowered expectations about being able to range far afield in search of caches, it is merely the responsible and community-minded thing to do to get out place caches. Yes, it takes some time, effort, materials and thought, but that's part of the process. So, what it amounts to is this: We're all cachers together. We all should contribute. If you're a cacher with 4-digit finds and single-digit owned, you're simply not pulling your weight and you need to rethink your role in this hobby community.

[+gof1]

The only thing I want returned for a hide is an appropriate log. If we start expecting people to maintain a ten percent hide ratio we are going to have a ton of crappy caches tossed out without thought to creativity or interesting local. Some people can hide nice caches and others can't. No sense in forcing the point.

 

Look at it like this, we all listen to music. Should we all record a song for every one hundred we hear? I know that none of you want to hear me sing.

[+StarBrand]

Not all cachers are hiders.

 

Lots of ways to give back to this little hobby of ours. Do CITO work, host events, leave quality trades, write interesting logs, hold GPS classes, participate in local groups, do cache maintenance for others, help newbies in the forums, help shape geocaching policy, donate to the authors that make Geocaching software, write geocaching software, rehide caches well etc......

[+Totem Clan]

What if they have two accounts. One for their finds and one for their hides. I know of couples that have 3 accounts. One for him, one for her and one for them. The joint account has all their finds and none of their hides.

Also their is a man here that is retired. He spends most of his time traveling all across the southern US. He comes back here only in the summer. It would be illogical and illresponsible for him to hide any caches as he could not maintain them.

 

I understand the why you think that there should be a certain hide to find ratio, but I find your post rude, presumptuous, unthoughtful, and unknowing. Yes, all cachers should give back to the hobby, but which of us should be the one to dictate the way and manner of the service to the game?

[+KoosKoos]

If I put out 500 caches that are all in gladware behind a dumpster to up my "hide ratio", have I given back more than someone who has 2 hides that are creative containers or in beautiful settings?

[+PJPeters]

You're going to find that you will be in the minority with this opinion. I would rather find two quality hides than ten park n grabs. Yeah, I've gone after numbers, but I still prefer to find a few really nice caches on a day trip.

What you propose would lead to over-saturation, masses of park and grabs, and basic bad caches.

At a rate of ten percent, I would need to find ninety four quality spots within my area. I don't want to try to keep up with all those. Think about when you reach one thousand. Would you like to try to maintain one hundred caches? Do you think you'd have time in the spring, when the snows melt and turn your logs to mush?

 

Thanks all the same, but I'll stick with my personal ratio of 1:1 - one hide to one good spot found to hide it at.

[+nicolo]

In the logs we receive from our caches, I am constantly dismayed to see so many cachers who have find numbers in the 4-digits and placed (owned) caches in the single digits. While I admire their dedication to the hobby, it strikes me that these people are getting much from it, but putting almost nothing back.

 

We have placed a fair number of caches in our moderately active career in caching. At present we have something like 29 caches owned and finds of 390. That would be a proportion of approx. 7%. I.e., 7 caches placed for every 100 found. At one time we had proposed on this forum that a ratio of 10:1 would be appropriate. For that we received a considerable amount of opprobrium. Why?

 

It seems reasonable that, if people are deriving enjoyment, fulfillment, entertainment, or whatever, from Geocaching, they should put something into it in return. To look at a recent (and typical) log on one of our caches, the cachers had finds of approximately 1400 and placed caches of 3. That's .2 percent.

 

Everyone likes to find caches. If everyone wants to find them but not so many are interested in placing them, where does that leave cachers and the hobby in general? In our times of lowered expectations about being able to range far afield in search of caches, it is merely the responsible and community-minded thing to do to get out place caches. Yes, it takes some time, effort, materials and thought, but that's part of the process. So, what it amounts to is this: We're all cachers together. We all should contribute. If you're a cacher with 4-digit finds and single-digit owned, you're simply not pulling your weight and you need to rethink your role in this hobby community.

We have a local cacher who believes that a high hide/find ratio is simply wonderful, the pinnacle of geocaching giving. He brags that he always has 200 bison tubes in his vehicle, ready to deploy.

 

The result? As several have mentioned, crappy hides. One of his caches in particular that another local cacher noted on another board is magnetically attached to a dumpster!!! Now why would a cacher want to go there? Why would a cache hider want to put a cache there? It baffles me.

[+gof1]

In the last 7 days, there have been 437846 new logs written

 

At ten percent that would require 43785 new caches. That is nearly eight percent of all caches ever hidden. seems like way to many new caches to ask the volunteers to review at one time. I also have to wonder how long before the weekly number of hides equaled the number of hides in the first couple of years.

[+ComputerCacheBug]

Considering how many caches are just tossed out film canisters next to trees or magentic altoid tins on a lamp post. Saying people shd hide based off the % the find is ludicrous.

 

I have no hides nor will I ever have a hide. There are plenty of others that are willing to put them out. I do my part with keeping them stocked with nice items. I Leave but rarely if ever take. (I also just became a Prem member and so have changed account names so checking my stats will find you nothing.) I also didn't log my finds on this site, I just sign the logs at the cache. back when I joined people were all to quick to point out peoples numbers and if their numbers weren't as high as theirs they had nothing worth contributing. (Granted that has changed these days, but it became my habit and I stick with it).

[+the hermit crabs]

At one time we had proposed on this forum that a ratio of 10:1 would be appropriate. For that we received a considerable amount of opprobrium. Why?

Because it's just a plain silly idea, for many reasons.

1. A find is a one-shot deal. Find it, log it, done. A hide, on the other hand, is a permanent maintenance responsibility for the owner. If I reach my limit on how many I can responsibly manage and maintain, does that mean I can never find another cache after I hit the golden 10:1 ratio?
   
2. Aside from the fact that any ratio at all is a silly idea, "10:1" is completely arbitrary. Why 10:1? Why not 1:1, or 100:1, or 1000:1? They're all equally ridiculous.
   
3. If we're talking about "pulling your weight", then should we be comparing finds vs. hides, or would it make more sense to compare "our finds of others' caches" vs "others' finds of our caches"? Not that I think we should be doing any such comparison at all, but if you want to institute such a silly "fair share" sort of regulation, then you should want me to put out caches that get as many finds as I have found caches. So if I find 1000, then I'd have to hide 10 caches averaging 100 finds apiece, or maybe just one very popular park-n-grab that has had 1000 finders.
   

You'll get a lot of other reasons in this thread, that have been repeated every time this notion comes up. Some people just aren't good hiders. Some people travel and can't maintain caches. Some people would hide a bunch of crappy tossed-in-a-bush caches just to maintain this arbitrary ratio. We'd all rather find caches that were hidden because people were inspired to hide a good cache, not because the hiders had an unpleasant chore to check off their list.

 

And most importantly, there are so many ways to contribute to caching other than just hiding caches: Writing nice logs. Posting pictures. CITO'ing. Helping newbies get started. Replacing wet or full logbooks. Moving travel bugs and coins along. Trading up at caches. Doing "community maintenance" on orphaned but still viable caches. Reporting problems with caches. The list goes on.

[+Random Acts]

Sorry, folks, all that whining about 'bad' caches and 'inimaginative' caches doesn't wash.

 

One of you had a good point about the ratio. I'm not proposing that everyone do 10:1, or any other arbitrary number. I was making the point that there are too many people out there who are only interested in finding and not in placing caches. No person of conscience can deny that if a person has 1000 finds, he/she ought to be putting more into the hobby and 3, or 10 or, all too often, 0 caches placed. Every needs to put something in and all too many are putting almost nothing while taking pretty freely. It's like a candy jar.

 

A point about finds being a one-time thing as opposed to placed caches requiring maintenance is valid. However, must I repeat that, if few place caches, then we run out of caches to find. We live in a medium-sized city and caching took a while to catch on here. For the longest time there were proportionately few caches to look for compared to other places, and we still could use more. I'll bet that the majority of the high-find/low-placed cachers live in large urban areas where there are an abundance of caches. The same goes for all you 'quality' whiners. A find is a find. Some are better than others but all give us a little thrill. That's why we do it.

[+briansnat]

Some people like to hide, some like to find and some like to do both. I'd rather that someone who has little interest in owning caches not bother, rather than place lousy, poorly maintained caches just to satisfy some arbitrary hide to find ratio.

[+Totem Clan]

.......or would it make more sense to compare "our finds of others' caches" vs "others' finds of our caches"?

Dam, I'm falling behind! I need to quit hiding so many and start finding more. My ratio is 1 to 3.

[+Random Acts]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

[+Totem Clan]

Sorry, folks, all that whining about 'bad' caches and 'inimaginative' caches doesn't wash.

 

One of you had a good point about the ratio. I'm not proposing that everyone do 10:1, or any other arbitrary number. I was making the point that there are too many people out there who are only interested in finding and not in placing caches. No person of conscience can deny that if a person has 1000 finds, he/she ought to be putting more into the hobby and 3, or 10 or, all too often, 0 caches placed. Every needs to put something in and all too many are putting almost nothing while taking pretty freely. It's like a candy jar.

 

A point about finds being a one-time thing as opposed to placed caches requiring maintenance is valid. However, must I repeat that, if few place caches, then we run out of caches to find. We live in a medium-sized city and caching took a while to catch on here. For the longest time there were proportionately few caches to look for compared to other places, and we still could use more. I'll bet that the majority of the high-find/low-placed cachers live in large urban areas where there are an abundance of caches. The same goes for all you 'quality' whiners. A find is a find. Some are better than others but all give us a little thrill. That's why we do it.

I live in the least cache dense area in all of the US, and still there is no way I could ever try to force anyone to hide a cache if they didn't want to. You are wrong for trying to do so. People give to the hobby just by playing. Every time a new finder shows up here, I send them an email to welcome them. By finding a cache they have increased the sport, and I'm grateful to have them.

If they ever want to hide a cache then that's even better, but to make them hide one would be irresponsible and might even drive them away. That's the last thing we need here.

[+hukilaulau]

edited cuz I don't know how to do multiple quote thingies...

Edited April 27, 2008 by hukilaulau

[+Team GeoBlast]

Sorry, folks, all that whining about 'bad' caches and 'inimaginative' caches doesn't wash.

 

A find is a find.

 

If you haven't already, you are going to soon realize that these are topics where cachers have opinions that are all over the board. So stating them as fact is not going to generate a productive discussion.

 

No person of conscience can deny that if a person has 1000 finds, he/she ought to be putting more into the hobby and 3, or 10 or, all too often, 0 caches placed.

 

No question that this hobby is, and will always be, what the players put back into it. Understand that if placing a cache was considered the only way to give back then the game would not be what it is today. My advice is to try to place some more value on the other ways that have already been mentioned that people can contribute. I'm personally grateful that this game is diverse enough where people can match their own talents and interests with the different ways that they can contribute.

Edited April 27, 2008 by Team GeoBlast

[+peanutbutterbreadandjam]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

Everyone else has responded far more eloquently than I ever could, but I will add this comment:

 

You make it sound like people remove caches. They don't - they find them and leave them where they found them. It's not like a candy jar at all. Unless it's the kind of candy jar where you take a candy out, lick it and then put it back...

 

The people that expect others to meet some kind of arbitrary find/hide ratio are very self-centred - they are either looking for praise from other Geocachers or are hoping to boost their find count by getting more caches into their neighbourhood. I am not sure it is either one or the other, perhaps both, but these people need to grow up and stop whining.

Edited April 27, 2008 by peanutbutterbreadandjam

[+hukilaulau]

And team Geoblast did it for me! But now I realize you really weren't looking for any discussion. You just wanted to express your opinions. Consider them expressed. You don't need to clarify anymore. We get it.

[+DanOCan]

...it is merely the responsible and community-minded thing to do to get out place caches. Yes, it takes some time, effort, materials and thought, but that's part of the process.

 

The problem is this: People who tend to worry about their hide/find ratio don't worry as much about time, effort, materials and thought when it comes to placing hides. "Uh oh, I'm falling behind on my number of hides, I better throw some bison tubes out the window of the car to get my numbers back up."

 

Hide a cache when you have a a great place or a great idea regardless of how many you have found.

[+gof1]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

 

I'm sorry, who is "whining"? Some of us have made statements as to why we think hide ratios are a bad idea. Those are in response to your op that seemed to complain about (whine) people who don't give back in the way youthink is appropriate. If you expect nothing but agreement you are in the wrong place.

 

As it now appears that all you wanted was to stir up a pot of angst soup I'm going to move on to other things. Feel free to talk badly about me in my absence.

[+uxorious]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

 

It is amazing, you are the only one here that is whining, and you accuse the rest of doing so.

 

Sorry, folks, all that whining about 'bad' caches and 'inimaginative' caches doesn't wash.

 

It is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. However, for most of us here it does "wash". Most of the reasons giving in this thread about why a hide/find ratio is not a good idea, are in fact, very valid, and for most will in fact "wash". Quite well actually.

[+KBI]

Speaking as a cache owner:

 

When people find and log my caches, I am happy. If they respect the container, the contents, the hide method, the secret, and each other, I am even happier. If they seem to have enjoyed the experience, I am ecstatic.

 

Whether any of those folks has hidden any caches themselves is completely irrelevant to my satisfaction and enjoyment as a cache owner.

 

Speaking as a cache seeker:

 

If the owner of a cache had a genuine, personal, and voluntary motivation -- in other words, if he hid his cache because he wanted to hide his cache -- then there is an excellent chance I will enjoy finding it.

 

I am not interested, however, in hunting any caches which the owners were told they were required to hide in order to meet some arbitrary hide-to-find proportion, and which would otherwise have never existed. A mandatory hide quota is a guarantee of lameness. If you think the anti-lameness complaining is bad now, just wait until your hide quota is enacted.

 

I want to hunt voluntary cache hides, not mandatory ones.

 

.... it strikes me that these people are getting much from it, but putting almost nothing back ....

 

.... It seems reasonable that, if people are deriving enjoyment, fulfillment, entertainment, or whatever, from Geocaching, they should put something into it in return.

Every needs to put something in and all too many are putting almost nothing while taking pretty freely. It's like a candy jar.

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

I must disagree with the premise of this argument. Saying that people should "give back" implies that they are taking something away.

 

I understand you feel that some folks are getting something for nothing, but enjoying the hunt for an existing geocache is not the same as "taking." Sure, cachers sometimes make unfair swag trades, but swag depletion is not what you’re talking about; you’re talking about the caches themselves. When someone else finds, logs, and properly replaces an existing cache, that act does not, by itself, reduce the number of caches available for me to hunt.

 

I particularly liked gof1’s post. His analogy is perfect:

 

One person listening to a song on the radio does not make the song unavailable to other listeners; one person finding a cache does not make the cache unavailable to other seekers.

 

Not everyone has a voice for radio; not everyone has the willingness and the ability to create and properly maintain a viable cache hide.

 

Everyone likes to find caches. If everyone wants to find them but not so many are interested in placing them, where does that leave cachers and the hobby in general?

I don’t agree that there is a problem. All the complaining I’ve been hearing, in fact, seems to be based on there being too many caches to choose from, not too few.

 

To answer your question: I think that leaves cachers, and the hobby in general, in pretty good shape. If a huge and diverse menu is the biggest thing we have to complain about, I’d say we’re doing great.

[+victorymike]

I'd prefer one quality cache than a bunch of crappy skirt lifters from my fellow geocachers. When I started I figured I'd put out a cache for every 10 I found (and I don't really place micros...just really full pretzel jars). Then I started caching in earnest. And I figured one cache placed for every 100 found would be good. Now...get real! That ain't happening. I've found 2706. It is hard enough to maintain the caches I have thanks to all the crapppy broken toys and dirty golf balls people keep putting in them. When I place a cache I fill it to the brim with goodies. New goodies. Still in the package. A cache with decent trade items, nicely hidden or well thought out is the type of cache I would prefer to find. Don't pressure people to put out a bunch of crappy caches in every lame blank spot just because they are enjoying finding geocaches.

[+TeamGumbo]

You know what's weirder to me? When folks have hundreds (thousands?) of finds, and not a single photo in their gallery.

 

Talk about not giving back!

 

[+TotemLake]

It's amazing that people can be so selfish and self-centered to really believe that hiding caches is the only way to give back to the game. And they have to do it by showing off the ratios. I'm of the mind they do this because they have to feel better about themselves by this kind of comparison which is truly meaningless. I find it even more amazing when an OP with the longevity as displayed in this thread can show that kind of relative tunnel vision.

 

There is more to giving back to the game than just hiding caches.

 

You haven't included the number of events they may have created, help to organize, or have gone to; all of which promote the game in bigger ways than hiding a cache.

 

You haven't taken into consideration the experience they can and generally do pass on to others. This is a huge promotion of the game.

 

You haven't taken into consideration that in spite of the big numbers, they are still enjoying the game. This in and of itself is the largest promotion of the game that I can see. It is represntation by example of how to have fun.

 

These same high numbered people go a long way to maintaining a lot of the caches that are already hidden. That's a lot of dedication to the sport which by the way, furthers the cause of the game more than creating additional hides.

 

I could easily go on about how narrow mindedly wrong the vision of just hiding caches by ratio to hides is so wrong in so many ways.

[+Morgan's Marauders]

The only thing I want returned for a hide is an appropriate log. If we start expecting people to maintain a ten percent hide ratio we are going to have a ton of crappy caches tossed out without thought to creativity or interesting local. Some people can hide nice caches and others can't. No sense in forcing the point.

 

Look at it like this, we all listen to music. Should we all record a song for every one hundred we hear? I know that none of you want to hear me sing.

 

I do!!

[Caphits]

It has been said many times over and over....It's not about the numbers.

[+ComputerCacheBug]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

 

THe only person whining is you. Everyone else has given examples of other means of giving back to the sport. If everyone hid as often as they found there would be no place to hide. Open your mind up and realize not Everyone needs to hide. But if it makes you feel better I just threw a film canister out the window. Come find it.

Edited April 27, 2008 by ComputerCacheBug

[+NeoAddict]

Now don't go getting your undies in a bunch over this.

It seems to me that if it bothers you THAT much, go out and boost the numbers in your area. Plant a bunch of caches if it makes you feel better. But really, you're preaching to the choir here.

 

If you're a cacher with 4-digit finds and single-digit owned, you're simply not pulling your weight and you need to rethink your role in this hobby community.

 

Aside from the fact that this statement is just plain rude, I think this comment only proves that you're the one doing the whining here, not the responders in the rest of this thread.

[+tozainamboku]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

I guess I'll join the bandwagon.

 

There are many ways to contribute besides hiding caches. Perhaps someone who doesn't hide many caches is the only person who is actually trading up by always leaving something of greater value in the cache than what he took. Perhaps he is the person who always brings extra pens and log books and plastic bags to repair or maintain the caches he finds that need a little extra care. Perhaps he is the person who conscientiously logs TBs he finds out of the cache and then promptly into a new cache consistent with the goals of the TB. Perhaps he always does CITO by picking up litter on the way to the cache site. Perhaps he always take time to write something nice in his logs instead of just TFTC. To argue that people who haven't hidden a certain percentage of their finds are not contributing is presumptuous.

 

As far as I'm concerned, I don't think there is any point to requiring any one who geocaches to give back in any way. The fact that people who do contribute do so because they want to makes the game more special. I can always say thank you to someone for placing a cache - even if it one I personally didn't enjoy - because I know they did it just out of love of geocaching. I can always look in amazement when I find a cache that has been around for a while that has a log book I can write in and may even have lots of good swag items someone has left. I can read interesting logs on my own caches or on caches I have on my watchlist. I'm not into TBs, but if I was I could watch my bug move from cache to cache and not go missing. Sometimes I wish more people would contribute is one way or another. But right now I'm just going to go out and find some caches because a few people hid them with out expecting anything from me other than I look for their cache.

[+Renegade Knight]

... At one time we had proposed on this forum that a ratio of 10:1 would be appropriate. For that we received a considerable amount of opprobrium. Why? ...

 

Why? Because it's not sustainable. You should maintain your caches. That takes an increasing amount of time as your number of hides increases.

 

The angle you really want is this: If you think 10:1 is fair or 20:1 or even 40:1 then think in terms of hours. 40 Hours of seeking for every hour of placing & maintaining.

 

But then the 1 can vary as well. 1 writing the kinds of logs owners love. 1 working with your local caching organization. 1 CITO, One working with land managers. 1 Working at the food bank. 1 in any combination.

[+Big Bear TC]

Okay I will play nice right now. Under this name for forum stuff I have 1 cache hidden and only 5 finds under this name. But as a family name I have well over 340. Also as a family we have hidden 20 caches. The only reason the one cache is under my name is because it is a theme cache I have and I will put a few more under my name.

Your proposal to make people hide caches will hurt our sport. There are people who hide caches but never had a single find. They would rather spend the time to do great caches for cachers to find and enjoy the posts.

A lot of them give back by doing CITO around the cache, hiking into the cache, and if they go a different way they pick up on the way out. Then there are people who repair the cache and put swag in it for others cachers without taking anything. So yes people do give back but not the way you want them to give.

[+StarBrand]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

Did you totally miss my post (#3)???? or are you dismissing it?

[+SgtSue]

The thing is you never know what goes one in someone else’s life. There are a million reasons why some people don’t hide caches. I have almost 2000 finds and only 2 hides. Due to my job that requires a lot of travel, often with little or no notice, that is all I can maintain. I think I give back by trying to write good logs, posting pictures, maintaining public bookmarks, creating routes for others to use for “caches along a route”, reach out to new cachers if only by email, etc, etc. I would rather someone not hide any, than put something out then not take care of it.

 

The point is, due what you are good at and what you have the time for. Don’t assume everyone else wears the same shoes you do.

[+WookieTravs]

 

I hope you had a fun caching day! I did.

[+gof1]

The only thing I want returned for a hide is an appropriate log. If we start expecting people to maintain a ten percent hide ratio we are going to have a ton of crappy caches tossed out without thought to creativity or interesting local. Some people can hide nice caches and others can't. No sense in forcing the point.

 

Look at it like this, we all listen to music. Should we all record a song for every one hundred we hear? I know that none of you want to hear me sing.

 

I do!!

 

Thanks, but no. Even I don't want to hear me sing. I couldn't bear to inflict that on others.

[Neos2]

In the logs we receive from our caches, I am constantly dismayed to see so many cachers who have find numbers in the 4-digits and placed (owned) caches in the single digits. While I admire their dedication to the hobby, it strikes me that these people are getting much from it, but putting almost nothing back.

 

We have placed a fair number of caches in our moderately active career in caching. At present we have something like 29 caches owned and finds of 390. That would be a proportion of approx. 7%. I.e., 7 caches placed for every 100 found. At one time we had proposed on this forum that a ratio of 10:1 would be appropriate. For that we received a considerable amount of opprobrium. Why?

I had to look. Your profile says you have 393 finds and 18 active caches. Aren't you behind by about 5 active caches by your own reckoning? (But hey, it's OK, my husband and I have 23 active caches between us with fewer than 900 finds each, so according to your theory-- if you split our caches between my husband and myself-- we have the 5 you are missing--so we've got you covered!).

 

Seriously, I'd rather see caches by people who like to hide caches and are good at it than some arbitrary number for everyone. It's better to hide good caches, in nice places, and maintain them well than to hide "enough" caches. Not everyone who appreciates art can create it, not everyone who appreciates music can compose it or perform it, and not everyone who enjoys finding geocaches can hide them. Quite possibly we can add "or should" to each of those senarios.

 

Folks have already jumped in to suggest many reasons why it's a bad idea to insist on a ratio, but the best reason I've seen mentioned so far is that simply "hiding caches" is not the best way or even the only way to support the hobby.

 

If you really were just hoping that more people would hide caches in your area for you to hunt, why not host an event where the theme is to create ready-to-hide geocaches of all shapes, sizes, and levels of cleverness? Even if the attendees don't want to hide a cache themsleves, they could help get one or two together for someone to hide!

[+J Loran]

If you really were just hoping that more people would hide caches in your area for you to hunt, why not host an event where the theme is to create ready-to-hide geocaches of all shapes, sizes, and levels of cleverness? Even if the attendees don't want to hide a cache themsleves, they could help get one or two together for someone to hide!

 

That's a really good idea. An actual tasty morsel floats to the top of the angst soup

[+DrgnTrappr]

Now I'm still pretty new to this, I have known about the hobby since its inception but just started playing in Dec. of last year. To date I have 23 finds and 1 hide, I am allways thinking about new hides but I wont just throw out a magnetic key holder on every gaurd rail I see. I dont like micro's but I have searched for a few, and some were very good hides.

My point is that I will only place a cache if I can make it interesting, or have an interesting location, and I do have plans for a micro of my own. There are already enough people placing boring caches out there so expecting everyone to put out a certain percetage of caches just does'nt make sense.

[+TrailGators]

I'm not sure why this topic keeps coming up. It's a game people! If you don't hide any or you hide duds then you'll never get to experience the joy of reading happy logs. So it all balances out...

Edited April 28, 2008 by TrailGators

[+gof1]

I'm not sure why this topic keeps coming up. It's a game people! If you don't hide any or you hide dudes then you'll never get to experience the joy of reading happy logs. So it all balances out...

 

I agree that those who don't hide, or just hide simple park-n-grabs miss out on the fun of finding great logs on their cache pages. That said I still think making cachers hide is not a good idea. The best caches are hidden by those with a genuine passion for hiding caches.

[Keystone]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

I need for you to dial it back a notch. Not everyone agrees that your proposal is a "simple and valid idea." This is a forum, so you're obligated to listen to those opinions. Unless, of course, you just wanted to post your views and would now like for your thread to be closed. If so, send me a PM or use the "Report This Post" tool or just post to the thread saying "end this."

 

Regards,

Keystone

The Moderator with the 76 to 1 finds-to-hides Ratio

Volunteering a Measly 25 hours per week for going on five years

[+TrailGators]

I'm not sure why this topic keeps coming up. It's a game people! If you don't hide any or you hide duds then you'll never get to experience the joy of reading happy logs. So it all balances out...

 

I agree that those who don't hide, or just hide simple park-n-grabs miss out on the fun of finding great logs on their cache pages. That said I still think making cachers hide is not a good idea. The best caches are hidden by those with a genuine passion for hiding caches.

I agree.

[+gof1]

The Moderator with the 76 to 1 finds-to-hides Ratio

Volunteering a Measly 25 hours per week for going on five years

 

Disgraceful! 76 to 1! How do you sleep at night? It would be nice if you could make a little time to give back to geocaching.

[+baloo&bd]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

 

You might want to read through the forums a bit prior to condemning us to wherever those of us without valid ideas are sent.

 

As much as most do not agree with your assessment, there is a larger group out there who have put forth the opposite view that was received with as much disdain.

 

Some have proposed on more than one occasion that you should have to find at least 100, 200 or more before placing your first cache to assure it is quality, Isn't there at least as much logic in that position as yours?

[+ThePetersTrio]

Some people give back by placing geocoins out in the wild too. With about a 20-50% chance of a $10 coin getting stolen within the first few months (depending upon where it's released) don't you (OP) think that would qualify as "giving back" to the sport too?

 

What about turning new people onto caching? Would that qualify?

 

People play the game in their own unique way. How about respecting that instead of trying to impose YOUR beliefs on how it should be played onto the rest of us.

[+Marcas_Found]

Quick simple easy reading:

 

1. We're military which = about 4 yrs in one place. So every cache we put out will have to be adopted at some point. Because of this we set a rule of 1 cache per 100 finds which gets us pretty excited when we get to hide a cache.

 

2. Has anyone taken into consideration the growth rate of this sport/hobby? I'll leave it at that.

 

3. Its a sport/hobby, enjoy it. Give back as you see fit.

 

4. A quote that may fit the situation since this discussion is based of of the "numbers" in people's profile's Before making an assumption: there are 3 sides to a story, yours, theirs and somewhere in between is the truth.

[+gof1]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

 

You might want to read through the forums a bit prior to condemning us to wherever those of us without valid ideas are sent.

 

As much as most do not agree with your assessment, there is a larger group out there who have put forth the opposite view that was received with as much disdain.

 

Some have proposed on more than one occasion that you should have to find at least 100, 200 or more before placing your first cache to assure it is quality, Isn't there at least as much logic in that position as yours?

 

Opposite side of the coin. I think that finding some caches before hiding is a good idea, but not something I think should be a rule.

[+baloo&bd]

it's amusing all the whining and and sarcasm about what is a simple and valid idea: put something back if you're taking out. Grabbing 1000 caches and only putting 3 out is a whole lot of taking and virtually no putting back.

 

You might want to read through the forums a bit prior to condemning us to wherever those of us without valid ideas are sent.

 

As much as most do not agree with your assessment, there is a larger group out there who have put forth the opposite view that was received with as much disdain.

 

Some have proposed on more than one occasion that you should have to find at least 100, 200 or more before placing your first cache to assure it is quality, Isn't there at least as much logic in that position as yours?

 

Opposite side of the coin. I think that finding some caches before hiding is a good idea, but not something I think should be a rule.

 

Didn't mean to sound like I did. Just offering another "valid" point of view others have proposed.