Jump to content

Minimum Requirements for placing cache


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

Our area newspaper had a front page article a few weeks ago about Geocaching (Very cool). Since the article ran there I’ve been seeing several newbie’s logging finds which is also great. However, some of the new folks are running right out after one or two finds and placing their own caches. I’m sure that they have the best intentions but the caches are haphazardly placed, barely concealed and the containers are not very good. Before you say ‘you don’t have to do them’, ‘people should coach them’ or something like that, should there be a minimum number of finds or some kind of ‘test’ before people can place caches?

Link to comment

Nope, I don't support a requirement.

 

Personally, I wanted to find a few before we placed one...mostly, I had to convince my son after the first 2 we did that it wasn't a good idea to run out and plop one down. He was REALLY eager.

 

And looking back at our second hide, it was a terrible location and ended up muggled within the first month. We learned from experience and a lot of these folks will too. Nothing wrong with offering some friendly pointers, but no reason to stifle someone just because they're new.

Link to comment

Our area newspaper had a front page article a few weeks ago about Geocaching (Very cool). Since the article ran there I’ve been seeing several newbie’s logging finds which is also great. However, some of the new folks are running right out after one or two finds and placing their own caches. I’m sure that they have the best intentions but the caches are haphazardly placed, barely concealed and the containers are not very good. Before you say ‘you don’t have to do them’, ‘people should coach them’ or something like that, should there be a minimum number of finds or some kind of ‘test’ before people can place caches?

 

I'd say you're going to get zero support here in the forums, as does anyone who has ever posed that question. I can see it from the perspective of your very unique situation though. Perhaps some very polite emails, that don't come off as pushy or know-it-allish?

Link to comment

No minimums, no test, no requirements.

But I think it is great that you have volunteered to host a local event that will discuss how to properly hide and place a cache as part of the educational activities.

 

LOL - I'm not that good. I'm not for a test etc. myself. BUT - the new caches may not be giving the best caching experience to the other new people. You see what I'm trying to say?

Link to comment

No minimums. Some of the best caches we've found were placed by people with very low/no finds.

 

Sometimes people with lots of finds "take things for granted" and just toss a container out there whereas someone with a few finds actually stops and thinks about all aspects of the cache before releasing it.

 

The caches we found by those with low find counts were that way. You could tell they thought about the hide long before placing it.

Link to comment

hey, it used to be in my area that most caches were interesting.

 

then someone saw where starbucks cache spew was popular elsewhere and thought they should bring that here. people see other bad ideas in other places and think it'd be swell to import them.

 

then new people get the idea that every roadside rock pile, guardrail, or garbage dump needs a cache. they think it's what caching is about. eventually, i hope, they either mature as cachers or they get bored of racking up smilies for trashcache dashes and move on to another activity.

 

every time i solve a puzzle only to find that i have unlocked the key to a poison ivy-infested guardrail, i think "why?" why not put it somewhere nice, or interesting to match the puzzle?

 

it isn't the new people that start the disappointing trend; it's people who ought to know better.

 

there was a time when a guardrail micro was clever because it was funny and unexpected. kind of a goofy joke. nobody really wanted to see the guardrail, or the parking lot.

 

but no. there shouldn't be a test. who would administer it? i may consider certain hiders to be unreliable and unskilled, but i don't want the responsibility of having to make a public judgement to that effect. some new hiders are gifted from the beginning. some never develop the knack of placing a good cache.

 

the great thing about the sport, though, is that it's unpredictable and small-d democratic. you never know what you're going to go see. part of the fun is going to find out.

Link to comment

This topic comes up pretty regularly and although the geocaching community would never support restrictions for newbies, I think there could be a lot of value in mentoring new people in the do's and dont's of caching including the suggestion that finding a bunch of caches before placing one might be a sensible idea. There are lot of nuances to placing a succesful cache and the best way to learn them is to visit a bunch of caches to see the potential issues (like poor container choice, poor locations etc).

 

I can write a novel without ever reading one first but, like most things, I'm likely to be a much better writer if I've read a lot of books first before writing my own.

Link to comment

hey, it used to be in my area that most caches were interesting.

 

then someone saw where starbucks cache spew was popular elsewhere and thought they should bring that here. people see other bad ideas in other places and think it'd be swell to import them.

 

 

You're lucky if you only have Starbucks parking lot hides.

 

Here, we have Starbucks, Wal-Mart, the video stores, McDonalds, Burger King, etc....

Link to comment

No minimums, no test, no requirements.

But I think it is great that you have volunteered to host a local event that will discuss how to properly hide and place a cache as part of the educational activities.

 

LOL - I'm not that good. I'm not for a test etc. myself. BUT - the new caches may not be giving the best caching experience to the other new people. You see what I'm trying to say?

 

You're not going to be able to educate every one and based on reading the getting started forum most new cachers are thrilled to find any cache. You're probably going to have a difficult educating every new cache owner but you *can* try to set an example by placing creative, well hidden and maintainable caches yourself. If enough people do it. You'll get a reputation of placing the best caches around and other cachers in the area may start to emulate your approach rather than those that are just tossing a film container in a bush.

Link to comment

NO! The best you can do is hide them like you like to find them and hope that sets an example.

 

With only two hides you are hardly going to get respect for the way you want things done! :anitongue:

 

LOL - But did you read the comments that were left for those two hides. Quality my friend, not quantity ;)

Link to comment

NO! The best you can do is hide them like you like to find them and hope that sets an example.

 

With only two hides you are hardly going to get respect for the way you want things done! :anitongue:

 

LOL - But did you read the comments that were left for those two hides. Quality my friend, not quantity ;)

Define a "quality" cache... please! Quality is totally objective, there can be no subjective standards for a "quality cache" because we all enjoy different things and all have different experiences even at the same cache.

 

That's why the dozens of attempts at this effort before yours have faded away... you can only define quality from your perspective.

 

Even voting systems don't work. You might can determine whether a particular cache is popular by vote consensus, but you can't port that unique experience to any other cache, so even "popular" does not mean quality and can't set a standard for "quality".

 

Your caches have great logs, obviously they are greatly enjoyed. If there can ever be a standard for quality the logs would have to be the determining factor... a consensus voting system of a sort... but how would you describe te elements that make those caches great in a way that would define a quality standard that others could follow?

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

NO! The best you can do is hide them like you like to find them and hope that sets an example.

 

With only two hides you are hardly going to get respect for the way you want things done! :anitongue:

 

LOL - But did you read the comments that were left for those two hides. Quality my friend, not quantity ;)

 

Having only two hides will have no bearing on whether or not your opinion gets respect. Your idea has merit, however so does the other sides.

 

For one, it would be very hard to regulate since there are many cachers that either do not log their finds or have a sock puppet account they use for hiding caches. Also, quality is very subjective. Lame is difficult if not impossible to define. As has been mentioned before, the first LPC (or for that matter the first you may have found) seemed unique and amusing. New cachers get the same experience the first one, which ones get removed?

 

There is also the element known as number seekers, they enjoy these caches as a quick #'s boost. Since there are ways for you and I to filter these out, they really are just a minor annoyance to some. The majority must enjoy them since they are among the most sought after caches. Even without their popularity, there is really no harm.

 

I proposed the same thing once, including only having PM's have the ability to hide, and I am not sure I have totally changed my mind however I do see many reasons for not having the gateway in place.

Link to comment

With only two hides you are hardly going to get respect for the way you want things done! :anitongue:

 

Apparently you forgot about this post.

 

TheAlabamaRambler:

"Numbers are no guide; some of the most respected cachers I know have relatively few finds. For years the webmaster who built and ran our Alabama Geocachers Association website hardly ever cached. He was one of the most respected and befriended fellows in the game in this area since 2002 and doesn't have 300 finds yet."

Edited by baloo&bd
Link to comment

With only two hides you are hardly going to get respect for the way you want things done! :anitongue:

 

Apparently you forgot about this post.

 

TheAlabamaRambler:

"Numbers are no guide; some of the most respected cachers I know have relatively few finds. For years the webmaster who built and ran our Alabama Geocachers Association website hardly ever cached. He was one of the most respected and befriended fellows in the game in this area since 2002 and doesn't have 300 finds yet."

You can take one sentence or phrase out of most any discussion and make it appear to say something different that what the author actually said!

 

Taken in the context in which I wrote it that quote is correct - as a means of categorizing cachers numbers are no guide.

 

As a means of determining a cacher's experience and how much credibility to give his opinion however, time in the game and numbers do matter and can be a guide. In fact on the internet they are about the only insight we have into that person.

 

Most of us are strangers here. If any cacher with 2 hides (even 2 obviously good ones) wants to restrict who and when the rest of us can hide caches how much credibility are you going to give him?

 

Please keep in mind that these comments are in no way personal... we're discussing one cacher but only in the context of the bigger issue of overall restrictions on the game.

Link to comment

With only two hides you are hardly going to get respect for the way you want things done! :anitongue:

 

Apparently you forgot about this post.

 

TheAlabamaRambler:

"Numbers are no guide; some of the most respected cachers I know have relatively few finds. For years the webmaster who built and ran our Alabama Geocachers Association website hardly ever cached. He was one of the most respected and befriended fellows in the game in this area since 2002 and doesn't have 300 finds yet."

You can take one sentence or phrase out of most any discussion and make it appear to say something different that what the author actually said!

 

Taken in the context in which I wrote it that quote is correct - as a means of categorizing cachers numbers are no guide.

 

As a means of determining a cacher's experience and how much credibility to give his opinion however, time in the game and numbers do matter and can be a guide. In fact on the internet they are about the only insight we have into that person.

 

Most of us are strangers here. If any cacher with 2 hides (even 2 obviously good ones) wants to restrict who and when the rest of us can hide caches how much credibility are you going to give him?

 

Please keep in mind that these comments are in no way personal... we're discussing one cacher but only in the context of the bigger issue of overall restrictions on the game.

 

TheAlabamaRambler:

 

You just wrote " You can take one sentence or phrase out of most any discussion and make it appear to say something different that what the author actually said! " and that is exactly what you did to me.

 

My question was " should there be a minimum number of finds or some kind of ‘test’ before people can place caches? " I did in no way say I believed there should be or restrict people - and just how did my credibility come into question? . The question was leaning to since the caching community can't one on one help every new person, should there be some Mechanism in place that educates new people, gives them experiences to see 'good' and 'bad' placements and helps them not make basic 'mistakes'.

 

Just for giggles see my coin I just launched - Piranha Geocoin

Link to comment

You just wrote " You can take one sentence or phrase out of most any discussion and make it appear to say something different that what the author actually said! " and that is exactly what you did to me.

 

My question was " should there be a minimum number of finds or some kind of ‘test’ before people can place caches? " I did in no way say I believed there should be or restrict people - and just how did my credibility come into question? .

 

A minimum number of finds or some kind of test IS a restriction.

 

Anyhoo, this discussion has apparently turned personal, something I expressly tried to avoid, so there being nowhere for it to go but downhill from here I will apologize, I really meant to address the topic, not you the person, and bail out of this one.

Link to comment

You just wrote " You can take one sentence or phrase out of most any discussion and make it appear to say something different that what the author actually said! " and that is exactly what you did to me.

 

My question was " should there be a minimum number of finds or some kind of ‘test’ before people can place caches? " I did in no way say I believed there should be or restrict people - and just how did my credibility come into question? .

 

A minimum number of finds or some kind of test IS a restriction.

 

Anyhoo, this discussion has apparently turned personal, something I expressly tried to avoid, so there being nowhere for it to go but downhill from here I will apologize, I really meant to address the topic, not you the person, and bail out of this one.

 

"A minimum number of finds or some kind of test IS a restriction." I did NOT say I advocated that !

 

I didn't make it personal or launch personal attacks - I'll take the strong tone was as a result of you holding resentment that we won the civil war :anitongue:

 

BTW - Like the coin?

Edited by WatchDog2020
Link to comment
I’m sure that they have the best intentions but the caches are haphazardly placed, barely concealed and the containers are not very good. Before you say ‘you don’t have to do them’, ‘people should coach them’ or something like that, should there be a minimum number of finds or some kind of ‘test’ before people can place caches?

Minimum number or test for placing geocaches? Nope.

 

Tutorial on placing geocaches? Yep. The tutorial on this site is pretty light on content. I created one a few years ago, but it's dated and in terrible need of proofing.

 

Instead of restricting newbies placing caches it should be impressed upon them that there is more to placing a successful and entertaining cache than plopping down any ol' container and grabbing a set of coords. At lot more goes into it than what appears at first blush.

Link to comment

One cache that was recently archived in my area showed that the newbie did not read anything. The cache lasted for about 3 months. They had two finds the first day and placed a cache the next, and no finds after that.

 

Reading the logs, I noticed the cache was an ammo can with original markings and no sticker. The cache contained food and a letter opener (knife). The coords were about 50 feet off and there were homeless that regularly drank nearby.

The "final straw" came when after the the fourth DNF in a row, someone said "I should have looked at the page and saw that it was placed by a newbie".

The cache owner erased the page and put in a paragraph that stated that the cache placement was ok because reviewers visit the cache site before they go public and that they wouldn't disable the cache. The local reviewer archived it a few hours later.

Edited by Wacka
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 3
×
×
  • Create New...