Jump to content

Found a new way to cache!


ReadyOrNot
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

<commentary>

 

My wife and I took a trip on the Oregon coast this weekend. Loaded the GPS with every cache for a 100 mile stretch of highway 101. We quickly discovered that most caches along the coast involve slowing the car down to about 20mph and hucking (yes, even regular sized ammo cans) out the car window. Sometimes they even land in interesting locations, but most of the time not. So we decided that instead of stopping, we'd just slow the car down to about 20mph, and take a quick guess as to where the offending container landed. I think we may have set a new 1 day caching record on this trip. Next time, we may try extending the range to about 1/2 mile on either side of the road and gather even more smileys.

 

I found myself anxiously awaiting the arrival of version 2.0 with its awards system.. Maybe then I can find the few gems hidden amongst the piles and piles of garbage.

 

</commentary>

Link to comment

Gosh why didn't I think of just loading in the cords and going to all the caches along the way--instead of pulling PQs into GSAK and looking through them to weed out caches that don't interest me?

 

I could have saved myself a dozen hours on the trip I'm planning in a couple of weeks through New England.

 

(By the way flask, did you do the two earthcaches near that cache you shared the log for? We aren't going across 2 in Mass, we are headed across 9 in New Hampshire to Vermont, but we thought once we got to Brattleboro we might swing down and catch at least one of those earthcaches on 2 before heading to Niagara Falls).

Link to comment

Gosh why didn't I think of just loading in the cords and going to all the caches along the way--instead of pulling PQs into GSAK and looking through them to weed out caches that don't interest me?

 

I could have saved myself a dozen hours on the trip I'm planning in a couple of weeks through New England.

 

(By the way flask, did you do the two earthcaches near that cache you shared the log for? We aren't going across 2 in Mass, we are headed across 9 in New Hampshire to Vermont, but we thought once we got to Brattleboro we might swing down and catch at least one of those earthcaches on 2 before heading to Niagara Falls).

 

two earthcaches? i only saw one. the potholes.

 

but i miss things sometimes.

Link to comment

Sorry your geocaching trip was so disappointing. When we ventured down and up the Oregon coast we did a fair number of caches and enjoyed the vast majority of them (read all). Not every one was spectacular but we didn't expect them to be. I think your post is just a bit over the top and is unfair. Give us a bunch of examples so we can reasonably judge for ourselves. This seems to be another broad stroke of the paint brush with no paint. It just comes up empty.

 

If you are so down on geocaching that you can't be bothered to slow down below 20 mph so that you might have an opportunity to take in some of the local flavor and ambience then I would think you need to be thinking about a different hobby. I trust you actually found the caches and signed the logs for all of the smileys that you are deriding.

Link to comment
I found myself anxiously awaiting the arrival of version 2.0 with its awards system.. Maybe then I can find the few gems hidden amongst the piles and piles of garbage.

 

Oh, I'm looking forward to it as much as anybody. You see, after the awards system comes out and enough time has passed that plenty of awards have been handed out, it'll be interesting to look at peoples caches that enjoy bashing cache hides in the forums.

 

Sort of like how much fun it is to read someone complain about how many micros there are, only to find that they've hidden 2 dozen micros themselves. This happened to me recently.

 

So, ReadyOrNot, I'm sure you're pretty confident that all your caches are going to get lots of really great awards right? Surely someone such as yourself, that knows so much about how caches are supposed to be hidden, will certainly lead the pack in awards.

 

We shall see.

Link to comment

 

We have roadside guardrail caches in MA? :rolleyes: Darn, all these years I've been spending my time in the woods. No wonder our totals are so low. Time to find me a road I guess.

 

Lots of caches of all types here in MA. You just picked the wrong ones I guess. Sorry you didn't enjoy your MA caching experience. And to tell you the truth, I've never even heard of the series you've linked to. lol

Link to comment

Seems to me that you just didn't make it far enough down the coast to get to the good stuff. You might have made it if you didn't waste so much time on caches you don't like. I've got about 50 caches hidden off hwy 101, only 2 of them are lame but there's a reason for them too.

 

I was interested in seeing what caches you were referring to but you haven't logged a find since January. I also noted that you have experienced some trouble with your own cache hides. I'm not pounding on you, just poking.

 

If you want some really good caching, visit Cape Arago or the Brookings area. There are NO LPCs in either area and darn few guardrail caches.

Link to comment

Gosh why didn't I think of just loading in the cords and going to all the caches along the way--instead of pulling PQs into GSAK and looking through them to weed out caches that don't interest me?

 

I could have saved myself a dozen hours on the trip I'm planning in a couple of weeks through New England.

 

(By the way flask, did you do the two earthcaches near that cache you shared the log for? We aren't going across 2 in Mass, we are headed across 9 in New Hampshire to Vermont, but we thought once we got to Brattleboro we might swing down and catch at least one of those earthcaches on 2 before heading to Niagara Falls).

 

two earthcaches? i only saw one. the potholes.

 

but i miss things sometimes.

Deerfield Basalt about 10 miles East. I just read your logs for the other one.

Link to comment

I didn't say they were all garbage, did I? I REALLY enjoy finding the good ones. If I didn't enjoy the hobby I wouldn't be wading through all the garbage to find the good ones now, would I? I did get the typical responses from the typical people. I guess I continue caching for the same reason I keep coming back to the forums... Occasionally you find something good amongst the garbage.

 

The whole point of the thread was that even after I tweaked my PQ as much as I could possibly tweak it, I still get the caches placed by the guy who just got a fresh prescription of tranquilizers. My wife and I made the best of the situation and had a great time of it... In spite of garbage caches as well as the garbage attitudes in these forums. :)

Link to comment

I was interested in seeing what caches you were referring to but you haven't logged a find since January. I also noted that you have experienced some trouble with your own cache hides. I'm not pounding on you, just poking.

 

I've done a fair share of caching since January. Just have not been logging online (have my own reasons).. Even went on a recent cache trip and nabbed about 30-40 and didn't log any of them. The others in the group did though. I may not have placed a lot of caches, but I believe in quality, not quantity. When you say I've experienced "trouble", could you be a bit more specific? The one I recently disabled was voted as one of the best views in the Portland east side. It was disabled because the puzzle was removed from the cache page. I am currently working on working around the issue so I can enable it again. I'm currently working on another cache that has been in the works for about 6 months. Could you be a little more specific in the "trouble" you are referring to? The fact that you are pulling numbers off my account to pass judgment is one of the reasons I don't log my finds anymore.

Edited by ReadyOrNot
Link to comment

One would think that after three years of playing the game that one would either come up with a way of minimizing his dissatisfaction or would quit and find something else to do.

 

I have been a huge supporter of a ratings system and am a very vocal supporter of the new awards system that is coming out. The current method of minimizing dissatisfaction is not acceptable.. I'm glad that you've found a way... Perhaps you are just more simple and easy to please?

Link to comment

i used to feel that every cache was a gift, and that even lame guardrail micros were fun.

 

that was back when a lame guardrail micro was unusual and therefore funny. or a quick smiley while resting between more taxing hunts.

 

i'm still having a grand time and even sometimes at lame guardrail micros, but they are becoming more and more the norm and THAT's why i'm making a fuss about it. i want to rattle people's bars about it, wake them up a little. i wish for the pendulum to swing back some, and have people put a little more effort into it.

 

there's no need for a micro at every starbucks or at every pull-off along a road, and i even see cases where a hider will place a lame roadside micro and then dress up the description so it sounds like a great place.

 

yesterday i found three caches: a micro at a starbucks, a multi with a standard ammo can in a field between box stores, and a waking tour of a shopping area parking lot. while i enjoyed all three to some degree, i wouldn't want people to assume that's the standard to which to aspire, or even the norm.

 

sadly, numbers spew is becoming more common because that's what people seem to want. quick number caches with little else to redeem them. it's lazy. i have to think (or at least hope) that if people were exposed to more good and interesting hides, they would know to want better than they're getting.

Link to comment

I do what the OP does, but I don't even slow down.

 

As I'm driving down the highway between interesting caches, it's fun to see roadside caches approaching on the GPS display, and as I'm driving by at full speed, figure it's gotta be riiiiiight ...there! Yep, that's where it'll be.

 

Of course I never log those.

 

More fun than playing word games with license plates, IMHO.

Link to comment

I missed the discussion on numbers last week but this is a better thread to respond to what Kit Fox had to say there.

Big numbers don’t make a good cacher and low numbers don’t make a bad cacher.

 

Great post.

 

 

Time and the cost of fuel have affected many cachers.

 

It seems a good portion of cache hunters prefer finding as many caches as possible, in the shortest amount of time. This type of caching has fueled "micro spew" which I dislike.

 

Those of us who like to place nice caches, in scenic locations that require additional time and effort to find, get discouraged because our caches rarely get more than one or two finds per year.

 

Here are two great examples of caches that used to require a good hike for a single cache, but misguided cachers decided to make the hike a power trail rather than one great hike for a single cache. Check out the google map.

 

Gods eye view

and

Slip Slidin' Away

 

 

You crack me up !!! Hey.... I just wanted to correct one statement you made.

In NO manner is Gods Eye View now a powertrail. Please do not attempt this MOUNTAIN without the proper preparation...ie... water, good shoes, and plenty of time. It is a toughy. Even Toz had to skip many of the caches along the top of the ridge (bushwacky area) on his recent trip up there.

Perhaps people create power trails or place a caches at every turnout going down a highway because they are into numbers and perhaps these aren't as exciting as a single cache at one turnout that happened to have a spectacular view or finding one cache a the end of a six mile hike. But I can't really understand all the fuss. Say you are traveling down the highway. Nobody is forcing you to stop at every cache you drive past. Suppose you find a certain cacher has placed a bunch of caches along your route. After finding a few you see they are all guardrail hides. It's not hard to just keep driving by the next one. And if you happen by a spectacular view you can still stop and take a look. Skip the guardrail and enjoy the view. Or as long as you stopped already, find this one.

 

The extra caches on Ladyface made a different experience than when I found God's Eye View the first time. Climbing up there twice (once to find the original cache and then the next weekend to replace the damaged container with an ammo can) was a great experience that I could brag about at geocaching events. But it was also fun to go up to find the new caches. And as Ventura Kids points out, I didn't think much of coming down with caches left to find up there for yet another trip. I'm sure that Slip Slidin' Away would have been a different experience had I gone there when there was only one cache. But this is certainly not a power trail an the caches are spread out along the hike, and doing it with one of the top "numbers" cachers was great fun. Kit Fox knows that some people have complained about my Lame(l) cache halfway up Mt. Baden-Powell. Apparently stopping to find an ammo can at the spring is detracting from the micro at the top.

 

As for ReadyOrNot, my way to cache is to stop when I'm not having fun and to never feel I have to find every cache. Sure, I'd like more tools to know which caches might be outstanding so I can find those and skip the ones that are less fun. I use the existing tools as much as possible. I look for caches with lots of interesting logs or are on someone's favorite list. I try to pick out cache that appear to be in interesting places by checking in Google maps or satellite views to see if the cache is in a park or a parking lot. And if I haven't done that I may decide whether or not to stop by just paying attention to where the GPS is pointing as I get near to the cache.

Link to comment

Say you are traveling down the highway. Nobody is forcing you to stop at every cache you drive past. Suppose you find a certain cacher has placed a bunch of caches along your route. After finding a few you see they are all guardrail hides. It's not hard to just keep driving by the next one. And if you happen by a spectacular view you can still stop and take a look. Skip the guardrail and enjoy the view. Or as long as you stopped already, find this one.

...

As for ReadyOrNot, my way to cache is to stop when I'm not having fun and to never feel I have to find every cache.

...

 

And if I haven't done that I may decide whether or not to stop by just paying attention to where the GPS is pointing as I get near to the cache.

 

Wise words, these. I've been at this for about a week now, and I've already learned to drive by - and if the area doesn't look interesting, I don't bother to stop. Granted, most of what is in my area is urban, and I haven't had much chance to get out and into the mountains yet...

Link to comment
I didn't say they were all garbage, did I? I REALLY enjoy finding the good ones. If I didn't enjoy the hobby I wouldn't be wading through all the garbage to find the good ones now, would I? I did get the typical responses from the typical people. I guess I continue caching for the same reason I keep coming back to the forums... Occasionally you find something good amongst the garbage.

 

The whole point of the thread was that even after I tweaked my PQ as much as I could possibly tweak it, I still get the caches placed by the guy who just got a fresh prescription of tranquilizers. My wife and I made the best of the situation and had a great time of it... In spite of garbage caches as well as the garbage attitudes in these forums. :)

The coolest thing about this hobby is that there is something for everyone. Unfortunately, this can create more work for those people who are easily dissatisfied. For those people that are both easily dissatisfied and don't want to put in any extra work, I suppose that it becomes downright unacceptable. Happily, I am not one of those people.

 

Similarly, people get different levels of satisfaction out of the forum posts of others. For instance, while you are no doubt pleased as punch with your OP and posts similar to the one that I am replying to, others likely find them to be unnecessarily rude and, therefore, 'forum garbage'.

Link to comment

 

The whole point of the thread was that even after I tweaked my PQ as much as I could possibly tweak it, I still get the caches placed by the guy who just got a fresh prescription of tranquilizers.

 

Did he (or she) at least use the bottles as cache containers? :D

 

I filtered out micro's :) I'll never make fun of a micro ever again though... I realize after this trip that boring ammo cans are worse than boring micro's... At least with the boring micro's, you have to search for them.. You could spot exactly where the ammo can was from 20 feet away in some cases. Apparently, a lot of cache hiders put the same amount of effort into re-hiding the cache as was originally put into placing it.

Link to comment
I didn't say they were all garbage, did I? I REALLY enjoy finding the good ones. If I didn't enjoy the hobby I wouldn't be wading through all the garbage to find the good ones now, would I? I did get the typical responses from the typical people. I guess I continue caching for the same reason I keep coming back to the forums... Occasionally you find something good amongst the garbage.

 

The whole point of the thread was that even after I tweaked my PQ as much as I could possibly tweak it, I still get the caches placed by the guy who just got a fresh prescription of tranquilizers. My wife and I made the best of the situation and had a great time of it... In spite of garbage caches as well as the garbage attitudes in these forums. :)

The coolest thing about this hobby is that there is something for everyone. Unfortunately, this can create more work for those people who are easily dissatisfied. For those people that are both easily dissatisfied and don't want to put in any extra work, I suppose that it becomes downright unacceptable. Happily, I am not one of those people.

 

Similarly, people get different levels of satisfaction out of the forum posts of others. For instance, while you are no doubt pleased as punch with your OP and posts similar to the one that I am replying to, others likely find them to be unnecessarily rude and, therefore, 'forum garbage'.

 

Oh, I'm quite sure someone hit the "report" button... It's easier to report a post than deal with the truth that lies within it. Why is it so hard to understand that accepting mediocrity breeds more mediocrity?? Be a part of the solution. Step 1) Place GOOD caches. Step 2) Stop visiting BAD caches. And for heaven sakes, quit being the spokesman for mediocre caches. You appear to place GOOD caches, so you know the difference apparently... Why be the spokeman for mediocrity when you clearly know the difference?

Link to comment

...We quickly discovered that most caches along the coast involve slowing the car down to about 20mph and hucking (yes, even regular sized ammo cans) out the car window....

 

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy finding them, but I can tell you that we had a lot of fun yelling "Pull" as we drove down the highway and trying to tag them with a shotgun. I need more practice. I wasn't hitting that many.

Link to comment

I was interested in seeing what caches you were referring to but you haven't logged a find since January. I also noted that you have experienced some trouble with your own cache hides. I'm not pounding on you, just poking.

 

I've done a fair share of caching since January. Just have not been logging online (have my own reasons).. Even went on a recent cache trip and nabbed about 30-40 and didn't log any of them. The others in the group did though. I may not have placed a lot of caches, but I believe in quality, not quantity. When you say I've experienced "trouble", could you be a bit more specific? The one I recently disabled was voted as one of the best views in the Portland east side. It was disabled because the puzzle was removed from the cache page. I am currently working on working around the issue so I can enable it again. I'm currently working on another cache that has been in the works for about 6 months. Could you be a little more specific in the "trouble" you are referring to? The fact that you are pulling numbers off my account to pass judgment is one of the reasons I don't log my finds anymore.

 

Specifically, the majority of your hides are out of action. Pulling numbers? Just trying to see what part of the coast you were referring to in your original post, not too sinister. I should have stated that I agreed with your original premise. Passing judgement? Not really, more of an observation than a judgement. I did offer a couple of suggestions for areas and the type of caches you would probably enjoy, did you see that part of my post?

 

I don't post a lot in the forums, bear with me a bit until I can figure out how to do it without ticking people off. Thanks.

Edited by trailsailor
Link to comment

Why is it so hard to understand that accepting mediocrity breeds more mediocrity?? Be a part of the solution. Step 1) Place GOOD caches. Step 2) Stop visiting BAD caches. And for heaven sakes, quit being the spokesman for mediocre caches. You appear to place GOOD caches, so you know the difference apparently... Why be the spokeman for mediocrity when you clearly know the difference?

 

I understand what you are saying completely. However, I do also want to point out that "rules" of this sport leave it wide open to different ways of playing. Here's a few different things that I've noticed from just this short time in the forums:

 

Some people are into the numbers

Some the FTFs (I confess to getting a little bit of a thrill when I got my first and only FTF).

Some people are into putting a cache in an area that is particularly special to them.

Some are into putting them in interesting locations

Some are into making them extremely hard to find (like the pinecone container)

Some are into interesting, unusual, and amusing cache containers.

Some people are into coins and TBs.

...and the list goes on...

 

One thing that I noticed from my area - some people seem to be motivated mainly by finding a spot that the only redeeming factor about it is the .1 rule.

 

Certainly we all have our particular preferences and interests. But is it really right or fair within the guidelines of the game to say that any one way is the right way and all else are wrong?

 

I certainly agree with your 2 rules. I intend to try to make my caches as interesting as possible (within the limits that I have of locations to place). In fact, I want to have a theme of spots that have some meaning to myself and my family and maybe tell a little story about us (which will be challenging as I've only lived here a few years and have no "roots" to the area). I have (for the moment) filtered micros out of my PQs as well - mainly because with the proliferation of them, I had my 500 cache limit within a 4 mile radius of my house! Not that they all suck, but there's a high percentage of them that don't at all interest me at this time.

 

I'm not posting this as an attack of any sort, in any direction - just saying that it is very simple to just drive past something that doesn't look interesting and keep going - and just because I don't like it doesn't make it "wrong."

Edited by derangedlunatech
Link to comment
I didn't say they were all garbage, did I? I REALLY enjoy finding the good ones. If I didn't enjoy the hobby I wouldn't be wading through all the garbage to find the good ones now, would I? I did get the typical responses from the typical people. I guess I continue caching for the same reason I keep coming back to the forums... Occasionally you find something good amongst the garbage.

 

The whole point of the thread was that even after I tweaked my PQ as much as I could possibly tweak it, I still get the caches placed by the guy who just got a fresh prescription of tranquilizers. My wife and I made the best of the situation and had a great time of it... In spite of garbage caches as well as the garbage attitudes in these forums. :)

The coolest thing about this hobby is that there is something for everyone. Unfortunately, this can create more work for those people who are easily dissatisfied. For those people that are both easily dissatisfied and don't want to put in any extra work, I suppose that it becomes downright unacceptable. Happily, I am not one of those people.

 

Similarly, people get different levels of satisfaction out of the forum posts of others. For instance, while you are no doubt pleased as punch with your OP and posts similar to the one that I am replying to, others likely find them to be unnecessarily rude and, therefore, 'forum garbage'.

 

Oh, I'm quite sure someone hit the "report" button... It's easier to report a post than deal with the truth that lies within it. Why is it so hard to understand that accepting mediocrity breeds more mediocrity?? Be a part of the solution. Step 1) Place GOOD caches. Step 2) Stop visiting BAD caches. And for heaven sakes, quit being the spokesman for mediocre caches. You appear to place GOOD caches, so you know the difference apparently... Why be the spokeman for mediocrity when you clearly know the difference?

I enjoy the game as it is, so I don't try to change it to be something else.

 

I respect that other people hide caches that they would like to find and that my likes and dislikes are not the same as that of others, so I don't attempt to change them so I am pleased to the detrimant of others.

 

I have learned that I am not after the same thing every time I look for a cache, so I can't expect someone else to wow me every time, even if he/she generally likes the same caches as I do.

 

I have learned that finding a cache that fails to wow me is not the end of the world and does not affect my continued enjoyment of the game.

 

I have learned that the majority of caches that others rail about are the one that are either quickly found or easily passed up. Therefore, having them affect me for more than the few moments that I am on-site is a poor use of my time.

 

I have come to realise that I play this game not to be wowwed by every cache, but to get a simple diversion from everyday stresses. Therefore, I am not affected by 'mediocre' caches.

Link to comment

...Oh, I'm quite sure someone hit the "report" button... It's easier to report a post than deal with the truth that lies within it. Why is it so hard to understand that accepting mediocrity breeds more mediocrity?? Be a part of the solution. Step 1) Place GOOD caches. Step 2) Stop visiting BAD caches. And for heaven sakes, quit being the spokesman for mediocre caches. You appear to place GOOD caches, so you know the difference apparently... Why be the spokeman for mediocrity when you clearly know the difference?

 

The problem is that the definitions are not universal. Night Stalker and I have similar tastes in caches. We also have more tolerance for 'crap' than our familes. We somtimes will make a crap run (by our families standards) to clean out the area, then bring the families to the good caches. The real irony is that on the crap runs we tend to have a lot more of the "man I'm I ever glad I brougth the camera for this, I sure wish the family was here to see it" moments. Not only do tastes differ (one mans trash/treasure) but we are often wrong going as to what kind of cache it's going to be. Yeah, we can hit 90% accuracy on crap, but that 10%. Wow!

 

To get that 10% you have to tolerate the crap and remember that it's only crap in your book. Seldom does any one cache rise to the level of universal craptastic wonder. That said, there is a lot you can do to make any one cache better that doesn't take away from any other reason it's being placed. That's really another thread though.

Link to comment

 

Perhaps people create power trails or place a caches at every turnout going down a highway because they are into numbers and perhaps these aren't as exciting as a single cache at one turnout that happened to have a spectacular view or finding one cache a the end of a six mile hike. But I can't really understand all the fuss. Say you are traveling down the highway. Nobody is forcing you to stop at every cache you drive past. Suppose you find a certain cacher has placed a bunch of caches along your route. After finding a few you see they are all guardrail hides. It's not hard to just keep driving by the next one. And if you happen by a spectacular view you can still stop and take a look. Skip the guardrail and enjoy the view. Or as long as you stopped already, find this one.

 

The extra caches on Ladyface made a different experience than when I found God's Eye View the first time. Climbing up there twice (once to find the original cache and then the next weekend to replace the damaged container with an ammo can) was a great experience that I could brag about at geocaching events. But it was also fun to go up to find the new caches. And as Ventura Kids points out, I didn't think much of coming down with caches left to find up there for yet another trip. I'm sure that Slip Slidin' Away would have been a different experience had I gone there when there was only one cache. But this is certainly not a power trail an the caches are spread out along the hike, and doing it with one of the top "numbers" cachers was great fun. Kit Fox knows that some people have complained about my Lame(l) cache halfway up Mt. Baden-Powell. Apparently stopping to find an ammo can at the spring is detracting from the micro at the top.

 

The same person wrote me a huge complaint email about my obtuse puzzle hidden somewhere hear the cache at the top.

 

As for ReadyOrNot, my way to cache is to stop when I'm not having fun and to never feel I have to find every cache. Sure, I'd like more tools to know which caches might be outstanding so I can find those and skip the ones that are less fun. I use the existing tools as much as possible. I look for caches with lots of interesting logs or are on someone's favorite list. I try to pick out cache that appear to be in interesting places by checking in Google maps or satellite views to see if the cache is in a park or a parking lot. And if I haven't done that I may decide whether or not to stop by just paying attention to where the GPS is pointing as I get near to the cache.

 

I spoke to Jeremy about the cache rating system when I met him at GW6. He actually said that he had recently thought of implementing the idea, as an option for the cache owner to enable or disable as they see fit.

 

When I made the 800 mile trip to Sacramento, I had about 250 "along the way" caches to choose from. I ended up opting to keep driving most of the time, and skip the P & Gs. I did make an exception to my disdain for lamppost caches, to add another county to my completed counties list. :) I also tried to spot the hiding spots as I whizzed by doing 70 mph.

Link to comment

...Oh, I'm quite sure someone hit the "report" button... It's easier to report a post than deal with the truth that lies within it. Why is it so hard to understand that accepting mediocrity breeds more mediocrity?? Be a part of the solution. Step 1) Place GOOD caches. Step 2) Stop visiting BAD caches. And for heaven sakes, quit being the spokesman for mediocre caches. You appear to place GOOD caches, so you know the difference apparently... Why be the spokeman for mediocrity when you clearly know the difference?

 

The problem is that the definitions are not universal. Night Stalker and I have similar tastes in caches. We also have more tolerance for 'crap' than our familes. We somtimes will make a crap run (by our families standards) to clean out the area, then bring the families to the good caches. The real irony is that on the crap runs we tend to have a lot more of the "man I'm I ever glad I brougth the camera for this, I sure wish the family was here to see it" moments. Not only do tastes differ (one mans trash/treasure) but we are often wrong going as to what kind of cache it's going to be. Yeah, we can hit 90% accuracy on crap, but that 10%. Wow!

 

To get that 10% you have to tolerate the crap and remember that it's only crap in your book. Seldom does any one cache rise to the level of universal craptastic wonder. That said, there is a lot you can do to make any one cache better that doesn't take away from any other reason it's being placed. That's really another thread though.

 

I agree that all caches have the right to exist. There are some days when I just want to go grab a couple of caches and have a very limited amount of time. This weekend was not one of those times and I came to the realization that there is not a very good method to find the types of caches that I want for a specific day and mood. What I thought I was going to get from my PQ and what I actually got were miles apart. Yes, I could have spent hours investigating the caches and reading logs to make the determination, but I didn't have time to do that. We made the best of the situation with the tools we currently have...

 

I'm glad that TPTB have not accepted mediocrity.. Otherwise they would have left things the way they were.. As long as the correct people see the problem and are actively developing solutions, I guess those that stick their fingers in their ears and yell, "Lalalalalalala, there's no problem" shouldn't bother me... Thank goodness there are those that believe that things can always be better and strive to make improvements, avoiding the rut of mediocrity that people get so comfortable sitting in.

Link to comment

...We quickly discovered that most caches along the coast involve slowing the car down to about 20mph and hucking (yes, even regular sized ammo cans) out the car window....

 

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy finding them, but I can tell you that we had a lot of fun yelling "Pull" as we drove down the highway and trying to tag them with a shotgun. I need more practice. I wasn't hitting that many.

 

my neighbors do not know why exactly they are hearing all that noise of me laughing uncontrollably, but you do.

 

on the topic of the "power trail": i think these can be done properly. crashco and i are about to receive exclusive permission to put a series of caches in a terrific trail network. there's a day use fee (don't get started on that; it's a 401c nonprofit and is viewed as equally appropriate as state or city parks with entrance fees) of $6, and we intend to make it a caching destination. we hope to nearly saturate it, which would make it a power trail, but we also want to provide a wide variety of hides across several different habitats. we hope to provide easy caches and hard ones and a bunch of fun surprises. it is our hope that a person might come and spend a whole weekend in this one small area.

 

come for the smileys, stay for the fun.

 

especially in this day of high fuel prices, we hope that our heavy density in this area will give people a heckuva good caching day for their $6 and only one parking place.

Link to comment

I don’t believe there is such a thing as a “bad” or even “mediocre” cache. Yes there are certainly caches I have enjoyed more than others, and there were some that have left little lasting impression on me. But this is not because some of these caches are “good” and some of these caches are “bad,” but because of my own specific and unique preferences as an individual. And I think we can agree, there are many opportunities for specific and unique differences among us. I know that a three mile hike up steep and beautiful terrain to reach only one cache will leave me very satisfied just from the experience alone, even if I have to log a DNF. But things may change. I may not always be a healthy 26 year old ready for a hike. For some, a hike may not be a physical option, so why should they be left out? Micros at every Starbucks allow even the wheelchair-bound to enjoy this great sport. Also, some may get a thrill flexing their stealth skills as they log caches in plain view of muggles ( I always find crowded places to be very exciting for a find). IMHO, keep placing any cache, anywhere. Some will hate it, but for some it may be the most appropriate and rewarding.

Edited by Zoe&Wash
Link to comment
I agree that all caches have the right to exist. There are some days when I just want to go grab a couple of caches and have a very limited amount of time. This weekend was not one of those times and I came to the realization that there is not a very good method to find the types of caches that I want for a specific day and mood. What I thought I was going to get from my PQ and what I actually got were miles apart. Yes, I could have spent hours investigating the caches and reading logs to make the determination, but I didn't have time to do that. We made the best of the situation with the tools we currently have...
One thing that you might consider is to take a look at the 'next' cache page (and the map location) before you head off after it. If it looks like a cache that you wouldn't enjoy, skip it.
Link to comment
I agree that all caches have the right to exist. There are some days when I just want to go grab a couple of caches and have a very limited amount of time. This weekend was not one of those times and I came to the realization that there is not a very good method to find the types of caches that I want for a specific day and mood. What I thought I was going to get from my PQ and what I actually got were miles apart. Yes, I could have spent hours investigating the caches and reading logs to make the determination, but I didn't have time to do that. We made the best of the situation with the tools we currently have...
One thing that you might consider is to take a look at the 'next' cache page (and the map location) before you head off after it. If it looks like a cache that you wouldn't enjoy, skip it.

 

Spent quite a bit of time doing that. Here's a comparison to the forums... Let's say, just for giggles, that you find 95% of my posts annoying and a waste of your time, so you put me on your ignore list. Unfortunately, you will be missing out on those 5% that may have been useful and helpful to you. If there was a way for you to ignore the 95% and show the 5%, I'm assuming you would do it? No system is ever going to be perfect, but when you settle for "The way things are" you'll never get the chance. When I leave for my caching trip, I want to be able to say, "I want to only find caches with a *wow* factor today"... or "I only want to find caches that are quick grabs today"(aka no intrinsic value besides numbers)... Right now, I can't do that without spending A LOT of manual time looking at each individual cache to determine how it fits in with my idea of adventure for the day. With a 100 mile stretch of road and hundreds of caches, that's quite the time consuming venture. You are happy with how you are doing it now, but many are not.

 

I don't know how to explain the problem any clearer than that...

Link to comment
Why is it so hard to understand that accepting mediocrity breeds more mediocrity?

Careful! Your pronouncements may be viewed as a call for folks to utilize at least a hint of creativity in their cache creation process, rather than the now accepted practice of spitting out a carpy container at an uninspired location. Too much of that and you'll be KBI'd into the "I hate all micros" crowd. :)

Link to comment
I agree that all caches have the right to exist. There are some days when I just want to go grab a couple of caches and have a very limited amount of time. This weekend was not one of those times and I came to the realization that there is not a very good method to find the types of caches that I want for a specific day and mood. What I thought I was going to get from my PQ and what I actually got were miles apart. Yes, I could have spent hours investigating the caches and reading logs to make the determination, but I didn't have time to do that. We made the best of the situation with the tools we currently have...
One thing that you might consider is to take a look at the 'next' cache page (and the map location) before you head off after it. If it looks like a cache that you wouldn't enjoy, skip it.
Spent quite a bit of time doing that. Here's a comparison to the forums... Let's say, just for giggles, that you find 95% of my posts annoying and a waste of your time, so you put me on your ignore list. Unfortunately, you will be missing out on those 5% that may have been useful and helpful to you. If there was a way for you to ignore the 95% and show the 5%, I'm assuming you would do it? No system is ever going to be perfect, but when you settle for "The way things are" you'll never get the chance. When I leave for my caching trip, I want to be able to say, "I want to only find caches with a *wow* factor today"... or "I only want to find caches that are quick grabs today"(aka no intrinsic value besides numbers)... Right now, I can't do that without spending A LOT of manual time looking at each individual cache to determine how it fits in with my idea of adventure for the day. With a 100 mile stretch of road and hundreds of caches, that's quite the time consuming venture. You are happy with how you are doing it now, but many are not.

 

I don't know how to explain the problem any clearer than that...

I think that you are missing the point of my suggestion. I am not suggesting that you spend hours of 'manual time' researching all the caches in your PQ. I am merely suggesting that you glance at the the cache page for the cache for which you are about to look. If you find from looking at that one cache page that that particular cache might not be one that you will be interested in, you can skip it and save yourself all the angst that you associate with finding a cache that doesn't meet your expectations. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

[quote name='ReadyOrNot' date='Jun 17 2008, 12:01 PM' post='3520554'

 

I don't know how to explain the problem any clearer than that...

 

I think the problem is that it is so subjective that you will never be able to tell the system "show me only the caches that I would consider good, and filter out all the crap."

 

You could look for a "star" system of rating caches and maybe search for only "3 star" or higher caches. Problem is, I could tape a micro to my trash can and have 10 of my friends find it and rate it "5 star."

 

I'm sure there would be ways to do more absolute searches - but even that would not be foolproof. You could do, say, "no caches within 1/2 mile of a road" - but if you are in any sort of urban area, that would eliminate pretty much every cache.

 

Maybe limit your PQ to 3 difficulty or higher caches? But then that would eliminate easy finds even if they are in good locations...

 

Another thought would be maybe some system combining ratings with a friends list - if you only "friend" people who's judgement you trust, and then do a search for only ones that they rated above a certain number....but of course, that could eliminate all those fantastic caches that none of your friends have seen...

 

I don't know the answer to this one. I'm just kind of free-form thinking ideas of pros and cons. It would indeed be nice to have something that could read our minds and know enough about each cache to be able to filter for us, but I just don't see how it could be done.

 

In the end, I really do think it comes down to too much subjectivity for a simple database search, too much reliance on the honesty of other cachers, or just elimination and legwork on your part - like was said before - if you drive past and the site looks thoroughly uninteresting, just keep on truckin'

Link to comment

 

OK, so this is not completely related to the original topic but kind. If get yelled at I can just start a new thread. Anyway, flask, how do you do that? I mean posting links in a log? All I can get it to do is to put a 'visit link' . What I saw on flask logs was that he/you (depending on who is reading at the moment, your pick) managed to get a link embedded with the log text. Pretty cool. I wanna know how to do that.

 

Let's see, I'll try it here:

 

linky

 

Did it work? Duh... have to hit 'Add reply first to find out...

 

 

It didn't work, had to edit it and use the block tags for the forum. But I know (think) that's not the way to do it on gc.com....

Edited by lrosell
Link to comment
how do you do that? I mean posting links in a log? All I can get it to do is to put a 'visit link' .

If you just include a raw link, you get the "visit link" thingy. You can use bbcode in logs just like in forums. Experiment in a forum box using the icons above the composition area, then copy those codes into logs, where you don't have the shortcut icons.

 

AFAIK, to link two logs to each other (as flask does), you have to post one of them unlinked, post the other with a link to the first, then go back and edit the first to link to the second. You end up with something like

 

[ url=http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=e1750765-a852-4695-95ca-60125f3e3b2e]on to Gods Eye View[/url]

 

but without the space after the first bracket, which I added to make the code visible.

 

I asked a few weeks ago if flask has tools to make this easier, but I didn't hear.

 

flask seems to manage to keep the majority of logs without the "edited by" part. I haven't figured out exactly when this is added, but it seems to be less likely if the editing is done immediately -- perhaps before it's been emailed to anyone.

 

I can see that it might be possible to build a logging tool using GSAK macros which did the linking, and which did it quickly enough to avoid most of the "edited by"s. But I don't know how flask is doing it.

 

Personally I sometimes like to direct friends to stories I've posted -- the same friends who sometimes get my hiking stories by email. flask-type links would make it possible for them to read a number of logs when I send them only one link. (I don't want to ask them to learn to navigate gc.com just to read my logs.)

 

A downside is that there's no way (or at any rate, neither flask nor I have found one) to stop gc.com from putting in the target=top attribute which forces opening a new window or tab on each link, resulting in a lot of open windows/tabs after reading a sequence.

 

My current method for linking friends to my stories is to use the myGME macro in GSAK to create a map on my web site, on which they can click on caches I've logged to.

 

Edward

Link to comment
even after I tweaked my PQ as much as I could possibly tweak it, I still get the caches placed by the guy who just got a fresh prescription of tranquilizers.

Perhaps you need to add GSAK to your toolkit. It builds on PQs.

 

Personally I simply do a PQ for terrain >= 3.0. It's amazing how much junk that gets rid of. Of course my (personal and idiosyncratic) definition of junk has a lot to do with the fact that I like long, hard hikes.

 

Edward

Link to comment

 

I asked a few weeks ago if flask has tools to make this easier, but I didn't hear.

Edward

 

sorry. i must have missed your email.

 

you all are very kind. yes, it is ubb code as explained above. i try to spit out the whole thing soon enough to avoid the "edited by" tags, but often miss the mark. at any rate, you can delete all but the most recent, so that helps some.

 

it does take a lot of time to link the logs, but i think it's the best way to tell the story with any continuity. and for me, it's largely about telling the story. maybe this doesn't happen to you, but one day i left the house to find some geocaches and i came back a different person than i went out.

 

the hunt is often full of mistakes and mishaps, lost afternoons and cold nights on the road. i am by turns puzzled and pleased, defeated and triumphant, lucky and hapless and if i get to say something sharp and funny or thoughtful and thought-provoking i'm thankful for the opportunity.

 

i like not knowing where i'm going; i like trusting the hider to bring me somewhere interesting or at least to bring me through an experience that's interesting. it is a leap of faith. sometimes i get to the cache and i think "what's the point of this?" and maybe these days it happens more often, maybe because hiders are lazier, maybe because i have fewer resources to spare and am therefore more critical.

 

the best part of my day is the part where i open up that box and paw through a few interesting trinkets on my way to a nice, dry logbook.

Link to comment

...Yes, I could have spent hours investigating the caches and reading logs to make the determination, but I didn't have time to do that. We made the best of the situation with the tools we currently have......

 

We use maps. Not always easy. Plus when we travel caching is not job 1. It's what we do when we say "ok, we saw the sights and sounds and still have 4 hours..." Then we look and see what's close and what sounds interesting. A portable internet connection would sure make that a lot easier.

Link to comment

I spoke to Jeremy about the cache rating system when I met him at GW6. He actually said that he had recently thought of implementing the idea, as an option for the cache owner to enable or disable as they see fit.

 

 

They use a rating system at www.geocaching.hu

You rate the "environment", the "hide" and the "web presentation" of the caches you find. The average is displayed on the cache page and makes choosing the "good ones" a lot easier.

Would be nice to see the option at the gc.com site as well.

Link to comment

Every cache has the potential of being disapointing or fun, it really depends on your state of mind and attitude towards what to expect. I have also heard that every cache has the potential of being a terrain 5 - depending on how you approach it. :(

 

The best way to find the "gems" is to skip the PQs and check out the bookmark lists.

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment

One would think that after three years of playing the game that one would either come up with a way of minimizing his dissatisfaction or would quit and find something else to do.

 

I have been a huge supporter of a ratings system and am a very vocal supporter of the new awards system that is coming out. The current method of minimizing dissatisfaction is not acceptable.. I'm glad that you've found a way... Perhaps you are just more simple and easy to please?

Perhaps the simplest among us is the one who needs a great deal or outside stimulous to be pleased. I personally find great pride and joy in the fact that I can be pleased by simple things. The degree of enjoyment you get from this game cannot be attributed to the actions of others, you must find it within yourself. Oh, Yeah...and if you don't like the Caches you can find listed here, you can always go play somewhere else.

Link to comment

One would think that after three years of playing the game that one would either come up with a way of minimizing his dissatisfaction or would quit and find something else to do.

 

I have been a huge supporter of a ratings system and am a very vocal supporter of the new awards system that is coming out. The current method of minimizing dissatisfaction is not acceptable.. I'm glad that you've found a way... Perhaps you are just more simple and easy to please?

I sometimes wonder why there is no backlash from moderators when there is such a rude attack and direct insult such as this. These forums are supposed to be free from these personal attacks, are they not? Your back handed comment is out of line and Just because someone has an opinion differing from yours does not mean they have a "Garbage attitude" . Why don't you get it together and behave like an adult, and if you're only 5 then I apologize, by all means...Continue

Link to comment

 

Oh, I'm quite sure someone hit the "report" button... It's easier to report a post than deal with the truth that lies within it. Why is it so hard to understand that accepting mediocrity breeds more mediocrity?? Be a part of the solution. Step 1) Place GOOD caches. Step 2) Stop visiting BAD caches. And for heaven sakes, quit being the spokesman for mediocre caches. You appear to place GOOD caches, so you know the difference apparently... Why be the spokeman for mediocrity when you clearly know the difference?

Is it hard to understand that a garbage attitude in a starting post will generate garbage attitude in replies?

Link to comment

Here's an option for you to consider...

 

Rather than not logging your finds, and then coming to the forums with vague accounts of all the crap caches you found, maybe you could ACTUALLY LOG your finds and tell the Cache owners directly how crappy their caches are. Of course this would require you to take resposnibility for the comments you have on each persons Cache.

 

What exactly were you expecting when you came here to the forums to brag about all the crap Caches you found, but leave no record of having found any at all. You cannot even back up your claims. I challenge you to log your finds and confront directly the quality of Caches you claim to have found.

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...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...