Jump to content

Planted first cache


Recommended Posts

Also, no I wasn't expecting glowing log entries. I was just surprised to have people apparently upset and disappointed at a cache. I guess I've learned there's an implicit expectation about cache location and a need to be explicit if there is nothing special about the location, and I was expecting it to be the reverse.

 

You can't please all of the people all of the time. It looks like your cache page doesn't promise anything that it doesn't deliver, and as long as that's the case, in my opinion that's whats important. Some people like to find 50 quick caches in a day, some would rather see scenic views and long hikes. Somebody looking for the latter is more than likely going to pass on the cache, while somebody looking for the former will almost certainly put it on their list.

 

Everybody has their own expectations as to what a cache should be, but as long as your cache page clearly states what the cache is like (and it does), nobody should really be complaining. I'll bet you'll get some logs of people who really enjoyed it though, don't let it ruin your day.

Link to comment

I still get upset when someone logs our caches and doesn't completely spill out their hearts gushing with love. Some folks, like me, not S, are just too sensitive. I always talk to her when we get a bad log so that I don't over-react for too long!

 

- T of TandS

Link to comment

That's really how I feel right now and my whole mindset why I put the cache there in the first place - you get to find another cache! :)

There are some people who feel that geocaching is about taking people to interesting places and would like to see every cache in a Wow location (just like some people think the should only be served Hagen-Dazs). While taking someone to an interesting place or one with a great view can certainly make a cache more memorable it shouldn't be a requirement. Before being grandfathered, virtual caches had to meet a Wow! requirement. That is they had to be place at a location that was novel or exceptional and had a special historic, community, or geocaching quality that set it apart from other locations. This put the volunteer reviewers in the unenviable position of having to make judgments about what locations were worthwhile. The definition of a geocache is a container with at least a log book that is hidden and where you can use GPS as an integral part of your search. Your cache met that definition.

 

Some people remember, incorrectly, a time when most caches were in interesting places and feel that in recent times these have be overwhelmed by caches in uninteresting places, just thrown out for the there to be another cache to find. They blame a new bread of geocacher who are motivated by the find count and claim that before this became a game of numbers all caches were placed in carefully selected locations. They want a game where finding the cache is secondary to discovering a new interesting location.

 

In reality caches were always placed in a variety of places not always the most interesting. When there were fewer caches to find, people put up with caches in uninteresting places. They may have even found these some what interesting. Why is this cul-d-sac here? I didn't know Wal*Mart has a dog walking area in the back of the store. Gee, there are homeless people living on this hillside in Beverly Hills. But as there are more and more caches, people look for ways to find ones that stand out for other reasons. What a great view of the city. That's a beautiful waterfall. I didn't know that this old historic building was here. Some people feel that the way to encourage caches be in interesting places is to criticize caches placed in what they feel are unworthy locations. This may have an effect as people will consider location the next time they place a cache, especially if they don't take criticism well. You also have the option to ignore the criticism once you understand that the wowness of a location is subjective and that plenty of geocachers are not expecting Hagen-Dazs on every cache.

 

From another recent thread on this topic

"Why did you bring me here?" "To find a cache; why did you come here?"

Link to comment
I've only done 31 caches and I've always been happy to find them wherever they were. Never really occured to me that people would have certain expectations and never entered my mind someone would be unhappy at finding a cache.

 

This thread might be interesting for you to come back at some later date. Your perspective will evolve with experience.

Mine sure has, but not in the way that you are suggesting. I've actually become much more accepting as I've become more experienced. It has led me to have much more fun in the game.

Link to comment
... Some people feel that the way to encourage caches be in interesting places is to criticize caches placed in what they feel are unworthy locations. This may have an effect as people will consider location the next time they place a cache, especially if they don't take criticism well. ...
I suspect that this behavior is more likely to just make the person not hide any more caches. Of course, Mr Crabbypants would almost certainly pat himself on the back if he knew this.
Link to comment
I've only done 31 caches and I've always been happy to find them wherever they were. Never really occured to me that people would have certain expectations and never entered my mind someone would be unhappy at finding a cache.

 

The debate of what qualifies a good cache versus a bad one will probably always be around, but as long as you are comfortable with a cache that you've placed and know that it's not in a "terrible area," hide what you like and don't worry too much about what people say...unless there's some "serious" issue that you overlooked or might not have known about.

 

As you find more caches and learn new hiding styles and techniques, you still may want to hide some "basic park and grabs," but your idea of what qualifies as a "good" cache will probably change and your hides will also change to reflect that.

Link to comment
Some people remember, incorrectly, a time when most caches were in interesting places and feel that in recent times these have be overwhelmed by caches in uninteresting places, just thrown out for the there to be another cache to find.

 

But that's how I remember it!! And all those ex-girlfriends? We always had GREAT times, right?

 

Memory is a funny thing. Things always seem better in the good ole days.

 

In about 20 years, be prepared for me to make a statement such as "I remember back in 'ought 8'...there was nothing but great hides as far as the eye could see!! Now all these new PNG cyber-hides are ruining the game!!"

Link to comment

When I started caching I was given the advice to find 100 or more caches before placing one of my own. It was excellent advice. I actually waited until I had found over 200 before placing any. By the time I'd found that many caches I'd seen some that were great and some that weren't so great. I'd learned that, while the first skirt lifter I found seemed to be an incredibly clever hide, the next and the next (and the next.......) showed me that I really didn't enjoy them so much after all. I found that a series of film cans stuck in every single guardrail along a 3 mile stretch of road wasn't inspiring or really much fun to find.

 

I'm really glad that I was advised to wait before placing caches and that I listened to that advice. There's a new cacher in my area who started out by hiding a bunch of caches that were illegal and had crummy containers. A number of folks immediately decided not to search for his caches. He hurt himself with the local caching community and may end up deciding he doesn't like caching or the local cachers simply because nobody wants to look for his caches.

Link to comment

...So I get this as my second log entry: "We didn't see much value to this cache other than a quick number as a park-and-grab. We were disappointed in this cache location."...

 

And yet not so dissapointed that they didn't log it and claim their number.

 

Some folks judge and grumble. That's their life, that's their job, that's their way. Forgive them for fun does not come easily to them.

Link to comment

...So I get this as my second log entry: "We didn't see much value to this cache other than a quick number as a park-and-grab. We were disappointed in this cache location."...

 

And yet not so dissapointed that they didn't log it and claim their number.

 

 

I'll agree with that one. There was a cache thet popped up one day not far from me so I thought I would go get another FTF. When I got to the location it was at the intersection of a rual road. As I got out of my truck the gps was pointing to the only obvious hiding spot. A stop sign. As I approached I saw that the ditch was full of trash, I'm talking full. This spot could've been a mini landfill. I just turned around got back in my truck and went home.

 

When I got home I posted a note much like the log on this cache. There was no way I would log such a cache for fear of encouraging the cache owner or anyone else for placing that type of cache.

 

There are good caches, lame caches (matter of opinion), and some caches that just shouldn't exisit.

 

El Diablo

Edited by El Diablo
Link to comment

Hey, that is the perfect introduction to a question I have. Is in appropriate to post a "Needs Archived" if a cache is hidden in an area full of trash with hypodermic needles around?

It's not appropriate to post a 'needs archived', but it is appropriate to note the problem or even help clean it up.

 

(Occasionally, someone will make a post about a filthy location and mention that there were hypos laying about. It always seems strange to me, as I have never seen a hypo 'in the wild'.)

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

I have a 4 cache series of dead end roads, the challenge usually lies in finding the right backroads to take more than finding the cache itself.

 

Don't let it get you down, I don't have a log like that yet and can see myself getting worked up over it... is so I'll come back and read my advice to you.

Edited by XopherN71
Link to comment

And yet not so dissapointed that they didn't log it and claim their number.

 

Not sure I follow this logic. They found the cache, it becomes part of their personal caching history and is logged as such. They didn't enjoy the cache and recorded their experience in their logs. I don't see how it is hypocritical to claim a find on a cache you didn't enjoy. (It might seem ironic that it is a happy face symbol, but that's hardly the finder's fault.)

Link to comment
And yet not so dissapointed that they didn't log it and claim their number.
Not sure I follow this logic. They found the cache, it becomes part of their personal caching history and is logged as such. They didn't enjoy the cache and recorded their experience in their logs. I don't see how it is hypocritical to claim a find on a cache you didn't enjoy. (It might seem ironic that it is a happy face symbol, but that's hardly the finder's fault.)
I think his point was that, based on the log, the finder pulled up at the scene and was turned off by it before ever getting out of his vehicle. As such, why bother getting out? It's a wonder that he didn't simply drive on to a cache that he would have enjoyed.
Link to comment
I think his point was that, based on the log, the finder pulled up at the scene and was turned off by it before ever getting out of his vehicle. As such, why bother getting out? It's a wonder that he didn't simply drive on to a cache that he would have enjoyed

 

Fair enough. I have done both in my caching career: pull up and drive away without even getting out of the car OR perform a search in an area that is less than desirable. Depends on my mood at a particular time.

Link to comment
I think his point was that, based on the log, the finder pulled up at the scene and was turned off by it before ever getting out of his vehicle. As such, why bother getting out? It's a wonder that he didn't simply drive on to a cache that he would have enjoyed
Fair enough. I have done both in my caching career: pull up and drive away without even getting out of the car OR perform a search in an area that is less than desirable. Depends on my mood at a particular time.
Me, too.

 

Honestly, my standard is to get out of the car and look around for a minute. If I make the easy find, great. Otherwise, a cache in a truly disgusting location would end up on my ignore list.

Link to comment
Some people remember, incorrectly, a time when most caches were in interesting places and feel that in recent times these have be overwhelmed by caches in uninteresting places, just thrown out for the there to be another cache to find.

 

But that's how I remember it!! And all those ex-girlfriends? We always had GREAT times, right?

 

Memory is a funny thing. Things always seem better in the good ole days.

 

In about 20 years, be prepared for me to make a statement such as "I remember back in 'ought 8'...there was nothing but great hides as far as the eye could see!! Now all these new PNG cyber-hides are ruining the game!!"

 

Now that's a funny response. But I have to Disagree with Mr. T's basic premise about there not being a time when most caches were in interesting places. I went and looked at my first year of geocaching, in which I amassed the amazing total of 220 finds. I did this because I know for sure I never had to ignore anything until 2005, nor did we have the ignore feature before 2005. I'm gonna say all but 5 of my finds were in nice locations, and I consider any park or biking/hiking trail or cemetery to be a nice location. Believe me, I went after anything listed. The worst I came up with locally was a keyholder on a guardrail near a baseball field complex. I'd also found 3 Interstate rest-stop micros (none locally to me), but the only other bad one wasn't even local to me, Not 'Reely' hard You want some honest feedback? Look at that thing! :) So that's 5 out of 220. I could find 220 micros in poor locations within 15 miles of my home coords today.

 

I also took the liberty of looking at the OP's cache deficient area. Before '06 there were only 12 caches within 10 miles of his cache. Looks like 11 regulars and a virtual, all in parks or nature preserves, as usually stated right in the cache descriptions. Numbers could be a little higher, as we can no longer search for archived caches.

Link to comment

And yet not so dissapointed that they didn't log it and claim their number.

 

Not sure I follow this logic. They found the cache, it becomes part of their personal caching history and is logged as such. They didn't enjoy the cache and recorded their experience in their logs. I don't see how it is hypocritical to claim a find on a cache you didn't enjoy. (It might seem ironic that it is a happy face symbol, but that's hardly the finder's fault.)

It's just ironic to dismiss the cache as worthless because it's only merit is as a number (implying numbers are worthless), but apparently numbers were important enough for them to put the work in to find the cache and claim their find. In other words there were in it for the very thing they bitched about.

Link to comment
It's just ironic to dismiss the cache as worthless because it's only merit is as a number (implying numbers are worthless), but apparently numbers were important enough for them to put the work in to find the cache and claim their find. In other words there were in it for the very thing they bitched about.

These last few posts got me to wondering so I went off to do a brief investigation. Yep, I think I have a perfectly valid reason for someone to not like a cache and log a find. He's not a paying member. He doesn't have the option of putting a cache on his ignore list as he doesn't have one. Also, considering he doesn't have PQs to work off of he has to rely on the Nearest Cache List. If he didn't log a find on that cache it would stare him in the face every time he goes to look for something to hunt.

 

I'd have to say, if I were in his shoes I'd do the same thing.

Link to comment
(Occasionally, someone will make a post about a filthy location and mention that there were hypos laying about. It always seems strange to me, as I have never seen a hypo 'in the wild'.)

 

You're lucky. We've found about 15. It's kind of expected in urban parks but strange when you find them out in the woods.

Link to comment
It's just ironic to dismiss the cache as worthless because it's only merit is as a number (implying numbers are worthless), but apparently numbers were important enough for them to put the work in to find the cache and claim their find. In other words there were in it for the very thing they bitched about.

...He's not a paying member. He doesn't have the option of putting a cache on his ignore list as he doesn't have one...If he didn't log a find on that cache it would stare him in the face every time he goes to look for something to hunt.

 

I'd have to say, if I were in his shoes I'd do the same thing.

 

You see, he CAN'T not find it!! He HAS to find it!! Or....it'll taunt him! Plus, he then HAS to log it....or....yeah, it'll taunt him some more. I mean, if it just happens to help his numbers, he'll suck it up and just accept it!

 

Somehow, in "real life" I'm able to ignore things that bother me without Groundspeak. How did I do it?

 

Ok, snark off. That wasn't directed to you (although I think you might NOT have been joking)....just directed to those who fell they HAVE to find every cache. :D

Link to comment

Some folks judge and grumble. That's their life, that's their job, that's their way. Forgive them for fun does not come easily to them.

 

I've been told that I'm hypercritical, and have a problem. :D I think I'm being honest. If it's an ugly spot, or a poor cache container, I will log thusly. I found a cache onece, in an industrial area, under a rock, in a mud puddle. I logged that it was the second ugliest place that I'd ever hunted a cache. The owner thought that hilarious, and wanted to know what the ugliest was. At that point, the ugliest was a crumbled pier, just north of the New York Sanitation Pier. Spectacular views of the Palisades and the Huson River, to be sure. But it was thirty feet from a homeless camp, and the rats running about were larger than some dogs that I've seen. Thanks, but I'm not sticking my hands into the crumbled pier. Both are since archived.

But, I also DNFed the one with the coords under the surveillance camera behind the KMart. And expressed my dislike of the spot. (Coords were seventy feet off, which did not help.) I had a log deleted because I had nothing nice to say about the micro hidden behind the handicapped parking sign attached to the wall next to the entrance to an eating establishment.

If I like the spot, I will tell you so. And, likewise, if I think it's a terrible spot, I will tell you so. That does not mean that fun does not come easy. It means that I have some standards! :D

Link to comment

I'm not going to comment on the cache itself. Y'all are doing that just fine :D

 

But I do want to complement bluepigninjas for coming back to this thread after posting his initial rant. And even admitting he's learning from the experience. :D

 

So many times in these forums we see "drive by" posts where a newbie comes in and rants about a problem he or she is having, then never posts again, despite dozens of posts trying to help.

 

Kudos to bluepigninjas :D

Link to comment
It's just ironic to dismiss the cache as worthless because it's only merit is as a number (implying numbers are worthless), but apparently numbers were important enough for them to put the work in to find the cache and claim their find. In other words there were in it for the very thing they bitched about.

...He's not a paying member. He doesn't have the option of putting a cache on his ignore list as he doesn't have one...If he didn't log a find on that cache it would stare him in the face every time he goes to look for something to hunt.

 

I'd have to say, if I were in his shoes I'd do the same thing.

You see, he CAN'T not find it!! He HAS to find it!! Or....it'll taunt him! Plus, he then HAS to log it....or....yeah, it'll taunt him some more. I mean, if it just happens to help his numbers, he'll suck it up and just accept it!

 

Somehow, in "real life" I'm able to ignore things that bother me without Groundspeak. How did I do it?

 

Ok, snark off. That wasn't directed to you (although I think you might NOT have been joking)....just directed to those who fell they HAVE to find every cache. :D

I wasn't joking. He found the cache, logged it, and now doesn't have to look at it again. Doesn't mean he has to like the cache.

 

Me, I can quietly click the ignore button instead of leaving a log.

Link to comment

But I do want to complement bluepigninjas for coming back to this thread after posting his initial rant. And even admitting he's learning from the experience. :D

Just what I was going to say. I was one of the people who disagreed with him but I'm impressed with his reaction to that criticism. Rather than going off in a hissy fit he read and understood what people were saying, considered it and made some adjustments. While he may still not agree with everything that has been said his reaction was a refreshing change.

 

Good on you bluepigninjas! :D

Link to comment

The cache description now lays it all out on the table for finders to descide for themselves if its a place want to visit. A good change that is appropriate in this instance for sure. You've dealt with the potential finders issues, and still have a cache out there to be found by anyone who cares to.

 

Locally we have a couple hiders that are in similar situations, but they refuse to see the problem with surprising finders with trash filled locations.

 

Kudos for taking stepping up and doing the right thing bluepigninjas. The listing is honest so any finders cannot complain they were unaware of the situation. Now surprise them with a tricky hide to compensate for the location.

 

I score hides by 3 criteria. The listing, The hide/container, and the location. As long as 2 of the 3 are pleasant the sin of the 3rd is forgiven.

Link to comment
It's just ironic to dismiss the cache as worthless because it's only merit is as a number (implying numbers are worthless), but apparently numbers were important enough for them to put the work in to find the cache and claim their find. In other words there were in it for the very thing they bitched about.

These last few posts got me to wondering so I went off to do a brief investigation. Yep, I think I have a perfectly valid reason for someone to not like a cache and log a find. He's not a paying member. He doesn't have the option of putting a cache on his ignore list as he doesn't have one. Also, considering he doesn't have PQs to work off of he has to rely on the Nearest Cache List. If he didn't log a find on that cache it would stare him in the face every time he goes to look for something to hunt.

 

I'd have to say, if I were in his shoes I'd do the same thing.

I may or may not have found the cache but I'd not of done the same thing.

For one thing bitching about a cache you chose to dislike as you found it is as optional as choosing to find it to begin with. They could have logged differently. "Knocked this puppy off my closest caches list". Doesn't say the cache is good, doesnt' say it's bad. Doesn't call their poor attitude into play either.

 

It's one thing to think you will have fun and don't. It's another to know you hate that kind of cache, know it wont' be fun, hunt it anyway, sure enough you aren't having fun but choose to keep on caching, then complain about the fun you didn't have. Even a movie critic has to keep an open mind going into a movie before they slam it. A good critic is at least construtive, or failing that lets you understand well enough to make your own judgment on your future enjoyment.

 

Crappy attitudes harm the activity as do poorly placed caches. The concept of "best for the activity" crosses owners, finders, and listing sites.

 

Edit: I find critics seldom useful, but sometimes when they do it well, I can tell if the reason they hated the movie is a reason that I like them and though it's backwards, it's useful.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

I too am still relativly new to this hobby with just 25 finds and 1 hide. There are alot of P & G' s around my area perhaps to many, and alot of micros to, but there are also alot with high degrees of terrain and difficulty. So my first hide was not quite a P&G, and there is a great river veiw. I just wanted it interesting enough that I would like to find it. Now there is one problem with my cache, the local fishermen leave all there trash close to my hide, I tried to keep it cleaned up at first but it overwhelmed me so now I just check it every now and then and restock it as needed.

Link to comment

I too am still relativly new to this hobby with just 25 finds and 1 hide. There are alot of P & G' s around my area perhaps to many, and alot of micros to, but there are also alot with high degrees of terrain and difficulty. So my first hide was not quite a P&G, and there is a great river veiw. I just wanted it interesting enough that I would like to find it. Now there is one problem with my cache, the local fishermen leave all there trash close to my hide, I tried to keep it cleaned up at first but it overwhelmed me so now I just check it every now and then and restock it as needed.

One thing you can do is leave a roll of trash bags in the cache and mention it in teh cache description so other cachers can carry out some of the trash that accumulates.

Link to comment
It's just ironic to dismiss the cache as worthless because it's only merit is as a number (implying numbers are worthless), but apparently numbers were important enough for them to put the work in to find the cache and claim their find. In other words there were in it for the very thing they bitched about.
These last few posts got me to wondering so I went off to do a brief investigation. Yep, I think I have a perfectly valid reason for someone to not like a cache and log a find. He's not a paying member. He doesn't have the option of putting a cache on his ignore list as he doesn't have one. Also, considering he doesn't have PQs to work off of he has to rely on the Nearest Cache List. If he didn't log a find on that cache it would stare him in the face every time he goes to look for something to hunt.

 

I'd have to say, if I were in his shoes I'd do the same thing.

I may or may not have found the cache but I'd not of done the same thing.

For one thing bitching about a cache you chose to dislike as you found it is as optional as choosing to find it to begin with. They could have logged differently. "Knocked this puppy off my closest caches list". Doesn't say the cache is good, doesnt' say it's bad. Doesn't call their poor attitude into play either.

You missed the point completely. You folks were talking about how much he disliked the cache, had said as much, yet logged his find anyway. I pointed out that he "claimed his smilie" so he wouldn't have to look at it again and that was the only option available as he wasn't a paying member.

 

Additionally, I find that it sours my stomach that you folks want to shut folks up when one's opinion of a cache isn't that favorable, but don't mind glowing reports if it is positive.

Link to comment

Additionally, I find that it sours my stomach that you folks want to shut folks up when one's opinion of a cache isn't that favorable, but don't mind glowing reports if it is positive.

 

I must have missed the part where folks were trying to shut up those who thought the cache wasn't favorable. It seems to me that most thought it was a bad cache.

 

El Diablo

Link to comment
It's just ironic to dismiss the cache as worthless because it's only merit is as a number (implying numbers are worthless), but apparently numbers were important enough for them to put the work in to find the cache and claim their find. In other words there were in it for the very thing they bitched about.
These last few posts got me to wondering so I went off to do a brief investigation. Yep, I think I have a perfectly valid reason for someone to not like a cache and log a find. He's not a paying member. He doesn't have the option of putting a cache on his ignore list as he doesn't have one. Also, considering he doesn't have PQs to work off of he has to rely on the Nearest Cache List. If he didn't log a find on that cache it would stare him in the face every time he goes to look for something to hunt.

 

I'd have to say, if I were in his shoes I'd do the same thing.

I may or may not have found the cache but I'd not of done the same thing.

For one thing bitching about a cache you chose to dislike as you found it is as optional as choosing to find it to begin with. They could have logged differently. "Knocked this puppy off my closest caches list". Doesn't say the cache is good, doesnt' say it's bad. Doesn't call their poor attitude into play either.

You missed the point completely. You folks were talking about how much he disliked the cache, had said as much, yet logged his find anyway. I pointed out that he "claimed his smilie" so he wouldn't have to look at it again and that was the only option available as he wasn't a paying member.

 

Additionally, I find that it sours my stomach that you folks want to shut folks up when one's opinion of a cache isn't that favorable, but don't mind glowing reports if it is positive.

 

Yeah, if someone off the street told me my car was a POS, I would be upset. If they said it was nice (and meant it) it wouldn't bother me.

 

Even on the message boards, there is a low tolerance for insults but they gladly allow complements.

 

It's weird how humans are like that.

Link to comment

...

You missed the point completely. You folks were talking about how much he disliked the cache, had said as much, yet logged his find anyway. I pointed out that he "claimed his smilie" so he wouldn't have to look at it again and that was the only option available as he wasn't a paying member.

 

Additionally, I find that it sours my stomach that you folks want to shut folks up when one's opinion of a cache isn't that favorable, but don't mind glowing reports if it is positive.

Maybe I did miss the point.

 

Here is my point in different terms. His log was bitching. Nothing more, nothing less. The kind of bitching that is annoying and grating. It wasn't useful.

 

There is a difference between. "Dude, your car sucks" and "Dude, your car's thermostat is stuck open so there's no heat, the radio only gets static and your steering wheel vibrates like your ball joints are out. I didn't have much fun hanging on for dear life, in the cold, without a radio".

Link to comment

There is a difference between. "Dude, your car sucks" and "Dude, your car's thermostat is stuck open so there's no heat, the radio only gets static and your steering wheel vibrates like your ball joints are out. I didn't have much fun hanging on for dear life, in the cold, without a radio".

 

Dude, when were you at my house? :D

Link to comment
That's really how I feel right now and my whole mindset why I put the cache there in the first place - you get to find another cache!

 

The geocachers who cache chiefly to increment their find counts would be delighted to find your cache. Those who use geocaching to discover cool places won't be terribly thrilled by it.

 

If you want to make both kinds of people happy, when you place a cache consider why you are bringing people to that spot. If it's only for the cache look for a better spot. There is no law that says park n grabs have to be in mundane or unappealing places.

 

In close to 7 years on these boards I've never seen a complaint about a geocache that was in a spot that was too interesting or too scenic.

Link to comment
That's really how I feel right now and my whole mindset why I put the cache there in the first place - you get to find another cache!
The geocachers who cache chiefly to increment their find counts would be delighted to find your cache. Those who use geocaching to discover cool places won't be terribly thrilled by it.

 

If you want to make both kinds of people happy, when you place a cache consider why you are bringing people to that spot. If it's only for the cache look for a better spot. There is no law that says park n grabs have to be in mundane or unappealing places.

 

In close to 7 years on these boards I've never seen a complaint about a geocache that was in a spot that was too interesting or too scenic.

On the other hand, the fact that the cache owner would have been happy finding a cache just like that one proves that it is a perfectly fine cache. Trying to please everyone is a plan that will only end in failure and angst.

 

The simple fact is, you will never make everyone happy. If you hide your cache in an interesting, scenic location, people will whine that the walk was too far, or that there were bugs, or that they spotted some poison ivy, or that the tradeables weren't to their liking.

 

In close to 7 years on these boards I've come to realize that some people will never be happy. They get their enjoyment from complaining and only feel better about themselves when they are acting superior.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
The simple fact is, you will never make everyone happy. If you hide your cache in an interesting, scenic location, people will whine that the walk was too far, or that there were bugs, or that they spotted some poison ivy, or that the tradeables weren't to their liking.

 

No but you can try to place caches that will appeal to the most people.

Link to comment
The simple fact is, you will never make everyone happy. If you hide your cache in an interesting, scenic location, people will whine that the walk was too far, or that there were bugs, or that they spotted some poison ivy, or that the tradeables weren't to their liking.
No but you can try to place caches that will appeal to the most people.
I don't know 'most people'. I know myself.

 

Since I've met alot of people who like caches that I like and because these people and others hide caches that I like, I feel comfortable in the belief that if I hide a cache that I would like to find, lots of other people will like it, also.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

I don't know 'most people'. I know myself.

 

Since I've met alot of people who like caches that I like and because these people and others hide caches that I like, I feel comfortable in the belief that if I hide a cache that I would like to find, lots of other people will like it, also.

I can't see anything wrong with that. If that's the kind of cache you want to hide go for it.

 

But just as all cachers have the right to hide whatever kind they like, all cachers also have the right to complain about what they don't like. That's the issue here.

Link to comment

I don't know 'most people'. I know myself.

 

Since I've met alot of people who like caches that I like and because these people and others hide caches that I like, I feel comfortable in the belief that if I hide a cache that I would like to find, lots of other people will like it, also.

I can't see anything wrong with that. If that's the kind of cache you want to hide go for it.

 

But just as all cachers have the right to hide whatever kind they like, all cachers also have the right to complain about what they don't like. That's the issue here.

Agreed. Everyone has the right to state that they did not enjoy any specific cache. When this becomes demanding and whining, the rest of us are free to roll our eyes.

Link to comment

I don't know 'most people'. I know myself.

 

Since I've met alot of people who like caches that I like and because these people and others hide caches that I like, I feel comfortable in the belief that if I hide a cache that I would like to find, lots of other people will like it, also.

I can't see anything wrong with that. If that's the kind of cache you want to hide go for it.

 

But just as all cachers have the right to hide whatever kind they like, all cachers also have the right to complain about what they don't like. That's the issue here.

Agreed. Everyone has the right to state that they did not enjoy any specific cache. When this becomes demanding and whining, the rest of us are free to roll our eyes.

:laughing:

 

 

 

Sorry!

 

I just couldn't resist.

 

You are correct sir. And if you 'plant' caches that are not up to the standard that many cachers expect, you WILL recieve complaints. That's just a fact. The OP should learn to expect it. After all cachers are human and, right or wrong, they voice their disapointments.

Link to comment
And if you 'plant' caches that are not up to the standard that many cachers expect, you WILL recieve complaints. That's just a fact. The OP should learn to expect it. After all cachers are human and, right or wrong, they voice their disapointments.

You will receive complaints, pretty much regardless.
Link to comment
You will receive complaints, pretty much regardless.

And that was my point. So the OP just needs to get used to it or quit hiding caches.

 

Case in point. This was logged on the first ever hide of one of the locals.

 

DNF August 27, 2006 by Didn't like the cache(355 found)

We didn't get here until 11pm but had two 1,000,000 cp lights and a 6v lantern. Found the first one immediately (20 seconds), the second in 10 minutes (very clever hide), but never found the final after searching for 2 hours. Major, major bushwacking here which one should never have to put up with. Huge rotted logs which you must traverse and often break through in very rough climbing terrain with small ravines and massive underbrush - possibility of breaking your leg. Also cockle burrs which you can't avoid and took 5 hours to get out of our long hair. Don't go here with ANYTHING exposed. We looked at the picture of the final someone else logged on here and we were in the correct place. Granted, nightime made it extra hard but with all the candle power we had, we could tell it would have been a nightmare in daytime too - just a smaller nightmare (although we may have found it then). Too bad the final is in such a rediculously rough terrain spot since the first two were very clever and fun, especially to do those two at night. In fact I would recommend doing those at night just because they were so fun and easy to do then. But never do the final at night!

 

The owner emailed me and asked what to do about it. I told him not to worry about it. It was on my to do list for the next weekend and that I would let him know what I thought about it, but that I was sure it was fine.

 

For my logs and others check out the cache.

Link to comment
Additionally, I find that it sours my stomach that you folks want to shut folks up when one's opinion of a cache isn't that favorable, but don't mind glowing reports if it is positive.
I must have missed the part where folks were trying to shut up those who thought the cache wasn't favorable. It seems to me that most thought it was a bad cache.

 

El Diablo

It certainly is the impression I'm getting from a few of the posts before the one you quoted. Note the advise on how one should write a log.

 

Note the other two logs aren't exactly glowing either yet who gets picked on.

 

Also, I seeing comments that are elevating the content of log well beyond what I read in it. The logger never said the cache sucked, shouldn't exist, or anything along those lines. In fact, in those 4 sentences they either stated concrete facts or expressed how they themselves felt about the cache without passing judgment on the cache. They said they didn't see much value in the cache, not there wasn't much value in the cache. They said they were disappointed in the cache location, not the cache location was disappointing which would imply it would be disappointing to most or everyone.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...