Micro Caches

[+TrailGators]

"Why are there so many micros"

 

Over the years, micros were hidden. New players game aboard, found the micros, and said"Ah Ha, you are supposed to place little caches".

 

More micros were hidden.

 

More caches found the game, found that many (a higher percentage every year) of the caches were micros, and now believe micros ARE the game.

 

I live in a very micro-heavy area, where it's not unusual for cachers to hide up to a dozen or more micros in a weekend.

Here's what you are missing:

 

The new players who you believe think that the game is about hiding and finding micros are actually enjoying the game. Those caches apparently meet the guidelines and they are enjoyed. Therefore, perhaps the game is not the problem and those other cachers are not the problem. Maybe you should look inward to find the source of your angst.

Where was the angst in Ed & Julie's post? The way I read it, Ed & Julie were just stating their observations. I agree with them that micros are the game for a lot of people because they are cheap, easy to hide and good for numbers.

[+sbell111]

"Why are there so many micros"

 

Over the years, micros were hidden. New players game aboard, found the micros, and said"Ah Ha, you are supposed to place little caches".

 

More micros were hidden.

 

More caches found the game, found that many (a higher percentage every year) of the caches were micros, and now believe micros ARE the game.

 

I live in a very micro-heavy area, where it's not unusual for cachers to hide up to a dozen or more micros in a weekend.

Here's what you are missing:

 

The new players who you believe think that the game is about hiding and finding micros are actually enjoying the game. Those caches apparently meet the guidelines and they are enjoyed. Therefore, perhaps the game is not the problem and those other cachers are not the problem. Maybe you should look inward to find the source of your angst.

Where was the angst in Ed & Julie's post? The way I read it, Ed & Julie were just stating their observations. I agree with them that micros are the game for a lot of people because they are cheap, easy to hide and good for numbers.

You might need to reread my post. You misinterpreted it. It's possible that you were trying to read into it more than there is. Edited October 13, 2008 by sbell111

[+tozainamboku]

"Why are there so many micros"

 

Over the years, micros were hidden. New players game aboard, found the micros, and said"Ah Ha, you are supposed to place little caches".

 

More micros were hidden.

 

More caches found the game, found that many (a higher percentage every year) of the caches were micros, and now believe micros ARE the game.

 

I live in a very micro-heavy area, where it's not unusual for cachers to hide up to a dozen or more micros in a weekend.

Here's what you are missing:

 

The new players who you believe think that the game is about hiding and finding micros are actually enjoying the game. Those caches apparently meet the guidelines and they are enjoyed. Therefore, perhaps the game is not the problem and those other cachers are not the problem. Maybe you should look inward to find the source of your angst.

Where was the angst in Ed & Julie's post? The way I read it, Ed & Julie were just stating their observations. I agree with them that micros are the game for a lot of people because they are cheap, easy to hide and good for numbers.

Only Ed & Julie don't say that people hide micros because they are cheap, easy to hide and good for numbers. Instead they say that people hide micro because they find mostly micros and that made them think you are supposed to hide micros. Ed & Julie speculate that that the percentage of micros has gotten so high that some people believe that only micros should be hidden.

 

sbell111 speculates that people hide micros because this is the type of cache they enjoy.

 

Cleary many people hide caches similar to ones they have found. Coming up with clever new kinds of hides is something that not everyone can do. And clearly some people with choose a container that is cheap and easy to hide. So my guess is that both TrailGators and Ed & Julie are at least partially correct in their reasons that so many micros are hidden. But still, I like to think like sbell111 that if people didn't really enjoy finding these caches few would be hidden. Of course I tend to hide ammo cans that required a long hike to get to and sometimes a difficult puzzle to solve. I find that very few people enjoy finding these caches (or at least don't think they would enjoy them enough to do the work involved in finding them). Still I hide them because I think the people who do find them will enjoy them. While I personally get less enjoyment finding urban micros than I do finding caches like the ones I hide, I get enough enjoyment from the urban micros that I can understand that some people enjoy them and I can't really object to there being too many of them because when I'm ready for a long hike or a tough puzzle I have no trouble finding a cache or two to do.

[+TrailGators]

"Why are there so many micros"

 

Over the years, micros were hidden. New players game aboard, found the micros, and said"Ah Ha, you are supposed to place little caches".

 

More micros were hidden.

 

More caches found the game, found that many (a higher percentage every year) of the caches were micros, and now believe micros ARE the game.

 

I live in a very micro-heavy area, where it's not unusual for cachers to hide up to a dozen or more micros in a weekend.

Here's what you are missing:

 

The new players who you believe think that the game is about hiding and finding micros are actually enjoying the game. Those caches apparently meet the guidelines and they are enjoyed. Therefore, perhaps the game is not the problem and those other cachers are not the problem. Maybe you should look inward to find the source of your angst.

Where was the angst in Ed & Julie's post? The way I read it, Ed & Julie were just stating their observations. I agree with them that micros are the game for a lot of people because they are cheap, easy to hide and good for numbers.

You might need to reread my post. You misinterpreted it. It's possible that you were trying to read into it more than there is.

I highlighted your conclusion in bold. There are two problems with it:

1) Ed & Julie never said there was a problem. They simply stated their observations.

2) I never saw how you concluded that Ed & Julie were feeling angst.

 

Finally, just because someone doesn't mention "enjoyment," doesn't mean that they think that people are not enjoying micros. We all typically do what we enjoy doing. So the "enjoyment" part goes without saying.

[+fizzymagic]

IMO, people hide micros because the guidelines encourage hiding micros. Probably unintentionally, but people tend to respond to incentives whether they are intentional or not. That's why putting a little more thought into and getting a little more feedback on the guidelines would be helpful. Whether you prefer micros or not, I believe there is clear evidence that the current guidelines subtly (and not-so-subtly) encourage them, and that is why they continue to grow in popularity.

 

For those who tend to fabricate angst where none exists: no, I did not say that micros are a problem. And no, I feel no angst about the number of micros out there. The only "problem" is that the guidelines have unintended consequences that nobody thought very hard about.

Edited October 13, 2008 by fizzymagic

[+TrailGators]

IMO, people hide micros because the guidelines encourage hiding micros. Probably unintentionally, but people tend to respond to incentives whether they are intentional or not. That's why putting a little more thought into and getting a little more feedback on the guidelines would be helpful. Whether you prefer micros or not, I believe there is clear evidence that the current guidelines subtly (and not-so-subtly) encourage them, and that is why they continue to grow in popularity.

 

For those who tend to fabricate angst where none exists: no, I did not say that micros are a problem. And no, I feel no angst about the number of micros out there. The only "problem" is that the guidelines have unintended consequences that nobody thought very hard about.

Hi Fizzy, I would be interested in hearing more about your hypothesis that the guidelines are unintentionally encouraging hiding micros.

 

Again, there is no angst. There is no angst. It's our new chant.

Edited October 14, 2008 by TrailGators

[+Parabola]

IMO, people hide micros because the guidelines encourage hiding micros. Probably unintentionally, but people tend to respond to incentives whether they are intentional or not. That's why putting a little more thought into and getting a little more feedback on the guidelines would be helpful. Whether you prefer micros or not, I believe there is clear evidence that the current guidelines subtly (and not-so-subtly) encourage them, and that is why they continue to grow in popularity.

 

For those who tend to fabricate angst where none exists: no, I did not say that micros are a problem. And no, I feel no angst about the number of micros out there. The only "problem" is that the guidelines have unintended consequences that nobody thought very hard about.

 

I too would like to hear the rest of your theory. It sound interesting.

 

Really I think the problem isn't the micro themselves. It's the number of caches that are place on private property without permission. The ones that usually violate this are normally urban micro's. Not all but the majority. So micro's are kind of being stereotyped into illegally placed caches.

 

Not all micro's are bad. Some of my favorite caches have been micro's. But again I would like to here more about your theory. It sounds interesting.

 

Uhhh am I suppost to have some of feeling of angst or something here???

[jholly]

I think it is rather simple. Most newer cachers are in urban areas and the caches they have been exposed to are micros. When they go to hide a cache all they know are micros. Also the ammo cans in the woods require work and thought. First you have to walk more than 20 feet from your car, lugging this heavy awkward container, watch out for snakes, stinging nettles, those pesky poison plants, deal with ticks, chiggers, bears, coyotes, cougars and other things that might view you as a food source, and then find a place to hide the container. Then try to get some co-ordinates under tree cover. Its a pain for maybe 4-6 visits a year. I have a couple guard rail hides that are frequently visited. My ammo cans in the woods get few visits and my cammoed multi gets maybe two visits a year. Sometimes I wonder why I don't just archive all but the micros, get some bision tubes, key cases, some blinkers and maybe a few altoid tins and put out caches that people find and log. I guess because I would rather have a nice walk in some really nice places to find that ammo can. The thing that really torques my jaws and gets my knickers in a bunch are the micros in the woods. The only I thing I can think is why?

 

Jim

[Clan Riffster]

As I haven't read the thread, this has most likely already been answered many times, but I'll share my opinion on the subject:

(*Note: For the purpose of this post, the term "micro" refers ONLY to those caches commonly referred to as Microspew*)

Multitudes of micros exist because there are folks who enjoy hunting for them. Some spew hunters enjoy them because they don't like a challenge. Anything requiring a modicum of effort is right out. Other spew hunters like them because they get to rack up 50 smileys in the time it takes me to get one. Naturally, when it comes time to hide caches, the same thought(less) practice applies, and you get even more carpy containers in uninspired locations. It's a virus. The best antibiotic I can think of is to start hiding caches that more closely appeal to your own aesthetics. Hopefully, the 'cheap & easy' crowd will eventually find yours, (after they run out of the hordes of Burger King shrubbery film cans), and they'll come to appreciate what a hint of extra effort can accomplish.

[Mr.Yuck]

IMO, people hide micros because the guidelines encourage hiding micros. Probably unintentionally, but people tend to respond to incentives whether they are intentional or not. That's why putting a little more thought into and getting a little more feedback on the guidelines would be helpful. Whether you prefer micros or not, I believe there is clear evidence that the current guidelines subtly (and not-so-subtly) encourage them, and that is why they continue to grow in popularity.

 

For those who tend to fabricate angst where none exists: no, I did not say that micros are a problem. And no, I feel no angst about the number of micros out there. The only "problem" is that the guidelines have unintended consequences that nobody thought very hard about.

 

I too would like to hear the rest of your theory. It sound interesting.

 

Really I think the problem isn't the micro themselves. It's the number of caches that are place on private property without permission. The ones that usually violate this are normally urban micro's. Not all but the majority. So micro's are kind of being stereotyped into illegally placed caches.

 

 

Finally, someone who shares my opinion on this matter! Amazing, I knew there had to be at least one other person in America!

 

Now all we need is the obligatory post from a reviewer saying we'd be surprised how many people CLAIM to have permission to hide a cache in some businesses parking lot, or tossed into their landscaping.

 

Angst is as angst does.

[+sbell111]

"Why are there so many micros"

 

Over the years, micros were hidden. New players game aboard, found the micros, and said"Ah Ha, you are supposed to place little caches".

 

More micros were hidden.

 

More caches found the game, found that many (a higher percentage every year) of the caches were micros, and now believe micros ARE the game.

 

I live in a very micro-heavy area, where it's not unusual for cachers to hide up to a dozen or more micros in a weekend.

Here's what you are missing:

 

The new players who you believe think that the game is about hiding and finding micros are actually enjoying the game. Those caches apparently meet the guidelines and they are enjoyed. Therefore, perhaps the game is not the problem and those other cachers are not the problem. Maybe you should look inward to find the source of your angst.

Where was the angst in Ed & Julie's post? The way I read it, Ed & Julie were just stating their observations. I agree with them that micros are the game for a lot of people because they are cheap, easy to hide and good for numbers.

You might need to reread my post. You misinterpreted it. It's possible that you were trying to read into it more than there is.

I highlighted your conclusion in bold. There are two problems with it:

1) Ed & Julie never said there was a problem. They simply stated their observations.

2) I never saw how you concluded that Ed & Julie were feeling angst.

 

Finally, just because someone doesn't mention "enjoyment," doesn't mean that they think that people are not enjoying micros. We all typically do what we enjoy doing. So the "enjoyment" part goes without saying.

Clearly, you are enjoying this back-and-forth. I don't understand why, but as long as you are enjoying yourself and not breaking the rules, I'm OK with it.

[Mushtang]

Wow, what an educational thread this has been. I've learned a lot about Micros:

 

1) They're not worthy to be placed where a Regular could have been placed.

2) They're mostly placed because they're cheaper/easier to place

3) A large number of people enjoy finding them, and they get found a LOT.

4) Sometimes a person that's complaining about them has actually hidden more than any other size.

5) They're only not acceptable if there's not a nice view nearby.

6) They're easy to avoid, yet some people still enjoy complaining that they exist.

7) They're hidden because they exist, and the existing ones teach newbies what should be placed.

8) They're hidden because gc.com guidelines encourage hiding micros over other types

9) They're bad because too many are hidden without adequate permission.

[+Moose Mob]

"Why are there so many micros"

 

Over the years, micros were hidden. New players game aboard, found the micros, and said"Ah Ha, you are supposed to place little caches".

 

More micros were hidden.

 

More caches found the game, found that many (a higher percentage every year) of the caches were micros, and now believe micros ARE the game.

 

I live in a very micro-heavy area, where it's not unusual for cachers to hide up to a dozen or more micros in a weekend.

Here's what you are missing:

 

The new players who you believe think that the game is about hiding and finding micros are actually enjoying the game. Those caches apparently meet the guidelines and they are enjoyed. Therefore, perhaps the game is not the problem and those other cachers are not the problem. Maybe you should look inward to find the source of your angst.

Where was the angst in Ed & Julie's post? The way I read it, Ed & Julie were just stating their observations. I agree with them that micros are the game for a lot of people because they are cheap, easy to hide and good for numbers.

You might need to reread my post. You misinterpreted it. It's possible that you were trying to read into it more than there is.

I highlighted your conclusion in bold. There are two problems with it:

1) Ed & Julie never said there was a problem. They simply stated their observations.

2) I never saw how you concluded that Ed & Julie were feeling angst.

 

Finally, just because someone doesn't mention "enjoyment," doesn't mean that they think that people are not enjoying micros. We all typically do what we enjoy doing. So the "enjoyment" part goes without saying.

Clearly, you are enjoying this back-and-forth. I don't understand why, but as long as you are enjoying yourself and not breaking the rules, I'm OK with it.

 

Chill out folks.

[+Vartan84]

I think a lot of it is that it is cheaper/easier to place a micro; no swag needed, no special container. My brother-in-law (who got us into caching), stopped for a long time because he was dismayed by the spew of micros popping up in North Carolina and his young kids like trading swag.

 

This describes every reason why I hate micros. I am very new to geocaching so I don't have much experience but micros almost never make for a fulfilling find. I had one yesterday which wasn't bad and one on Sunday which I enjoyed but almost every other one I've been incapable of finding. Basically they could be anywhere, especially when hidden in nature, and so you just bushwhack around a tree for 10 to 20 minutes feeling stupid and then give up having found nothing. Or if you do finally found it you say "oh, there it is", sign your name and it's done. Where's the satisfaction or fun in that really? I really want to have a filter on the map that leaves out micros because they really are horrid.

For example one on Saturday was clearly hidden in a stone wall area. It wasn't the worst spot because it had been the sight of a battle and had a cannon there for decoration, but the micro didn't appear to be anywhere around the cannon and most likely hidden in the wall. You could tell the rocks had all been upturned by past cachers looking. After a lot of searching I gave up because even if I found it I lost the desire or need to find it since it was pretty boring. Even worse was the one I went to before that which was basically off a highway in growth on the side of the road. After a lot of walking around the growth and wondering how many ticks I was gathering I just gave up, it is too vast and messy an area to expect us to find a random pill or film can in there so why bother, just so I can sign my name and log "found it" on the site (since there usually isn't anything else of interest to write about micros anyway!)

 

On the other hand, I guess if there were no micros there'd be less caches.

 

That's what I'd prefer. I'd rather drive 10 minutes for a good old ammo can creatively hidden in the woods than 1 minute for 10 pill bottles strew across the ground or in bushes like they were trash. When I find those it makes me wonder what the difference is comparing a microcache to trash we see day after day on the side of the road, is there any fun or magic to trash? One day if any good samaritan muggle comes by and sees the film can they'll clean it up and that'll be the end to that, what's the use? I don't mean to rant but I'm new to the hobby but already have a very frustrating relationship with micros and avoid them as much as possible- but like most of you the majority in my area are them!

[Mushtang]

On the other hand, I guess if there were no micros there'd be less caches.

That's what I'd prefer. I'd rather drive 10 minutes for a good old ammo can creatively hidden in the woods than 1 minute for 10 pill bottles strew across the ground or in bushes like they were trash. When I find those it makes me wonder what the difference is comparing a microcache to trash we see day after day on the side of the road, is there any fun or magic to trash? One day if any good samaritan muggle comes by and sees the film can they'll clean it up and that'll be the end to that, what's the use? I don't mean to rant but I'm new to the hobby but already have a very frustrating relationship with micros and avoid them as much as possible- but like most of you the majority in my area are them!

I have some really good news for you! If you join the web site and become a premium member, you'll never have to see another micro cache again. You can create Pocket Queries to search for caches and exclude Micro sized caches completely! Woo-HOO!

 

You'll miss out on the occasional Micro that you might have liked, but you'll still be given a virtual limitless supply of non-Micro sized caches to go hunt for. You'll be as happy as you can be.

 

Welcome to the hobby, and welcome to the forums.

[+Gorge_Hiker]

-//- To those that want to avoid finding micros, just don't load them into your GPSr. PQ filters make this easier than creating a thread to complain about them.

its not the size, its the location, the experience.

ive done micros at monuments, chapels, historic sites, there is at least something to see.

but lamppostskirts... dumpster behind stores... parking lots...

if at least yer cleaning up a bit that ld be good.

 

quote]

 

I have to agree. I mostly place micros for the following reasons.

 

1. I usually carry a couple with me. I have been on many hikes, or drives where suddenly I see a great idea for a cache (last week my car hit 200K miles and I wanted to put a cache where I rolled over to 200K)

2. Cheaper (nuf said)

3. you can get more creative (making them look like bolts etc)

4. most of all...I aim to bring people to the places I put most of my caches because there is a nice hike, beautiful scenery, or otherwise enjoyable place to discover, the swag isn't what is important to me when I place a cache.

 

It is, however annoying when it seems a micro was just thrown somewhere that "didn't have a cache yet" and you go there is no view, no swag, not even a nice hike.

[Mr.Yuck]

Wow, what an educational thread this has been. I've learned a lot about Micros:

 

1) They're not worthy to be placed where a Regular could have been placed.

2) They're mostly placed because they're cheaper/easier to place

3) A large number of people enjoy finding them, and they get found a LOT.

4) Sometimes a person that's complaining about them has actually hidden more than any other size.

5) They're only not acceptable if there's not a nice view nearby.

6) They're easy to avoid, yet some people still enjoy complaining that they exist.

7) They're hidden because they exist, and the existing ones teach newbies what should be placed.

8) They're hidden because gc.com guidelines encourage hiding micros over other types

9) They're bad because too many are hidden without adequate permission.

 

I agree with 1,2,4,7 and 9. On 8, I'm still waiting for that explanation.

[Skippermark]

HIJACK:

 

More and more people are calling what was traditionally a micro (find-a-key, altoids tin, m&m tubes, prescription bottles) "small containers" for the same reason. As more people do it, new players think it's the norm....and I get called a "cache cop" for pointing it out

Here here! I like all types of caches but get frustrated by containers that are sized smaller than what they were considered in the past.

 

I suppose technically a full size altoids tin is bigger than a 35mm container, and it can hold some coins and things, but I've still always considered them micros.

 

I like to move travel bugs, and numerous times we've put some bugs into our packs to drop off into a "regular" size cache, only to get there and see that's its a 2x3x4 lock and lock and the TBs won't fit.

 

Edited for typo.

Edited October 14, 2008 by Skippermark

[+The Cachster]

Personally i myself am agenst micros (once in a while but i just love ammo cans) but the thing is i hate it when you come along (the cache is a micro) but in the location you could have put a coupal ammo can. What do all of you think about this

[+WRASTRO]

Personally i myself am agenst micros (once in a while but i just love ammo cans) but the thing is i hate it when you come along (the cache is a micro) but in the location you could have put a coupal ammo can. What do all of you think about this

I have a micro in an area that the original finders objected to because they said the area could support an ammo can. I told them they were entitled to their opinion and I was happy with the hide and my reasons for the container size. That being a container in view with no cammo that was still hard to find. Last year the area around the cache was "mowed" by the power company and if my hide had been a larger container it would have been destroyed. As it is my hide was not affected and it is still going strong and people are still complaining that they can't find it and giving various reasons why. I check it after every few DNF logs and it is always right where it is supposed to be.

 

The argument about placing the largest container the site can handle is just as lame as the old argument that there should be some sort of hides to finds ratio. The hider should take care to use a container that is in keeping with the intent of the hide. In fact the history of this particular hide proves that I chose the right size container for the site.

[+Ed & Julie]

On the other hand, I guess if there were no micros there'd be less caches.

That's what I'd prefer. I'd rather drive 10 minutes for a good old ammo can creatively hidden in the woods than 1 minute for 10 pill bottles strew across the ground or in bushes like they were trash. When I find those it makes me wonder what the difference is comparing a microcache to trash we see day after day on the side of the road, is there any fun or magic to trash? One day if any good samaritan muggle comes by and sees the film can they'll clean it up and that'll be the end to that, what's the use? I don't mean to rant but I'm new to the hobby but already have a very frustrating relationship with micros and avoid them as much as possible- but like most of you the majority in my area are them!

I have some really good news for you! If you join the web site and become a premium member, you'll never have to see another micro cache again. You can create Pocket Queries to search for caches and exclude Micro sized caches completely! Woo-HOO!

 

You'll miss out on the occasional Micro that you might have liked, but you'll still be given a virtual limitless supply of non-Micro sized caches to go hunt for. You'll be as happy as you can be.

 

Welcome to the hobby, and welcome to the forums.

 

Did you skip over the portion of the thread discussing hiders who mis-state (on purpose or in ignorance) the size of the container...usually a "micro" listed as a "small". No way to filter those out.

 

Ed

[+TrailGators]

On the other hand, I guess if there were no micros there'd be less caches.

That's what I'd prefer. I'd rather drive 10 minutes for a good old ammo can creatively hidden in the woods than 1 minute for 10 pill bottles strew across the ground or in bushes like they were trash. When I find those it makes me wonder what the difference is comparing a microcache to trash we see day after day on the side of the road, is there any fun or magic to trash? One day if any good samaritan muggle comes by and sees the film can they'll clean it up and that'll be the end to that, what's the use? I don't mean to rant but I'm new to the hobby but already have a very frustrating relationship with micros and avoid them as much as possible- but like most of you the majority in my area are them!

I have some really good news for you! If you join the web site and become a premium member, you'll never have to see another micro cache again. You can create Pocket Queries to search for caches and exclude Micro sized caches completely! Woo-HOO!

 

You'll miss out on the occasional Micro that you might have liked, but you'll still be given a virtual limitless supply of non-Micro sized caches to go hunt for. You'll be as happy as you can be.

 

Welcome to the hobby, and welcome to the forums.

 

Did you skip over the portion of the thread discussing hiders who mis-state (on purpose or in ignorance) the size of the container...usually a "micro" listed as a "small". No way to filter those out.

 

Ed

I already know the answer Ed:

If you join the web site and become a premium member, you'll never have to see another micro or small cache again. You can create Pocket Queries to search for caches and exclude Micro and Small sized caches completely! Woo-HOO!

I checked and I have a dozen regulars within 5 miles of my house to find. I have 75 regulars within 10 miles and 500 regulars within 23 miles of my house. I have to admit that he's got a point, although he could have had a smoother delivery. I can't remember the last time a 500 cache PQ around here had a whopping 23 mile radius!

Edited October 15, 2008 by TrailGators

[Mushtang]

On the other hand, I guess if there were no micros there'd be less caches.

That's what I'd prefer. I'd rather drive 10 minutes for a good old ammo can creatively hidden in the woods than 1 minute for 10 pill bottles strew across the ground or in bushes like they were trash. When I find those it makes me wonder what the difference is comparing a microcache to trash we see day after day on the side of the road, is there any fun or magic to trash? One day if any good samaritan muggle comes by and sees the film can they'll clean it up and that'll be the end to that, what's the use? I don't mean to rant but I'm new to the hobby but already have a very frustrating relationship with micros and avoid them as much as possible- but like most of you the majority in my area are them!

I have some really good news for you! If you join the web site and become a premium member, you'll never have to see another micro cache again. You can create Pocket Queries to search for caches and exclude Micro sized caches completely! Woo-HOO!

 

You'll miss out on the occasional Micro that you might have liked, but you'll still be given a virtual limitless supply of non-Micro sized caches to go hunt for. You'll be as happy as you can be.

 

Welcome to the hobby, and welcome to the forums.

Did you skip over the portion of the thread discussing hiders who mis-state (on purpose or in ignorance) the size of the container...usually a "micro" listed as a "small". No way to filter those out.

 

Ed

No, I didn't skip over it at all. There are no filters for caches that are mislabeled, so if a micro is called a small, or a micro is called a regular, there's really no hope to somehow keep from having those in the PQ if you filter out micros. That's about as weak of an argument as those that say they like some micros so they'd like to be able to filter out some and keep only micros that they'd enjoy.

 

My intent was to very nicely explain to someone rather new to the hobby that what they were after, ammo cans and no micros, was a lot easier to get if they became a premium member and used PQs. I'm sure after they've been here a while they'll come back and complain that there's no filter to get rid of caches they don't like.

[+fizzymagic]

IMO, people hide micros because the guidelines encourage hiding micros.

Hi Fizzy, I would be interested in hearing more about your hypothesis that the guidelines are unintentionally encouraging hiding micros.

I've been outta town with bad Internet. I'll post more tomorrow. I'm not ignoring you!

[+sbell111]

IMO, people hide micros because the guidelines encourage hiding micros.

Hi Fizzy, I would be interested in hearing more about your hypothesis that the guidelines are unintentionally encouraging hiding micros.

I've been outta town with bad Internet. I'll post more tomorrow. I'm not ignoring you!

It sure was lucky that you were able to post that reply.

[+TrailGators]

IMO, people hide micros because the guidelines encourage hiding micros.

Hi Fizzy, I would be interested in hearing more about your hypothesis that the guidelines are unintentionally encouraging hiding micros.

I've been outta town with bad Internet. I'll post more tomorrow. I'm not ignoring you!

No problem.

[Mr.Yuck]

IMO, people hide micros because the guidelines encourage hiding micros.

Hi Fizzy, I would be interested in hearing more about your hypothesis that the guidelines are unintentionally encouraging hiding micros.

I've been outta town with bad Internet. I'll post more tomorrow. I'm not ignoring you!

No problem.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb, and guess that the fact that virtual caches are no longer accepted is part of the reason? I could be way off base. Maybe I should have made that a private guess in my head. Ignore this post, please.

[Clan Riffster]

i hate it when you come along (the cache is a micro) but in the location you could have put a coupal ammo can.

If you're saying what I think you're saying, then I would agree whole heartedly. For our hides, the location largely dictates the container size. When I teach newbies, I preach the axiom of hiding the largest container an area will support. However, it's important to understand that this is just a principle, followed by some, and not a guideline. Heck, it wouldn't even qualify as a rule of thumb, seeing as how there are gobs of folks out there who think it's "clever" to hide a micro in the woods.

[+Parabola]

I haven't been around since virtuals where still going so they where all ready gone but didn't they end those because the where being placed where containers could have gone and there wasn't an opportunity to trade swag and the sheer number in what they where being placed? So they nixed them and eventually created Waymarking.com.

 

Could one compair the over-doing it with placing micro's to that??

 

This is a serious question with no angst attached. I just wish to know how the virtuals died and it this is correct then wouldn't eventually micro's be doing the same thing? The only difference is you are placing a container. But that container can't hold any swag in, and people sticking them on anything and everything.

 

I really think the days of trading items in caches is about done with, which is sad cause my son just loves to trade and until he get's older I don't take him caching anymore due not much has tradeable items in them anymore. But I have put out a private cache for him (not listed anywhere) and when he does want to go out we head over and go hiking out to it. And I still take him on maintace runs with me. But I guess that's the issue for me is the swag part. If it's me caching by myself then no swag is fine but if I take my family along, there better be a toy or something to trade for. We do have lots of funny things that happen to us and some great memories of our travels and that's really the important part, but the dissapointed look on my son's face when we pull a film can out of a tree is so sad.

[Mr.Yuck]

I haven't been around since virtuals where still going so they where all ready gone but didn't they end those because the where being placed where containers could have gone and there wasn't an opportunity to trade swag and the sheer number in what they where being placed? So they nixed them and eventually created Waymarking.com.

 

Could one compair the over-doing it with placing micro's to that??

 

This is a serious question with no angst attached. I just wish to know how the virtuals died and it this is correct then wouldn't eventually micro's be doing the same thing? The only difference is you are placing a container. But that container can't hold any swag in, and people sticking them on anything and everything.

 

 

You were supposed to ignore my post! Some have argued that the end of "cheap and dirty virtuals" resulted in the proliferation of "cheap and dirty micros", but I have no idea if that's were Fizzy is headed, I may be way off base.

 

I've been around over 5 years, and the unabashed virtual era even pre-dates me!! So only the oldest of the old school were around. It was May 2003 (someone can correct me if I'm wrong by a month or two) that they nixed them, but technically still allowed them if they met the "Wow factor". Problem is, no one ever defined the "Wow factor".

 

Some reviewers would still allow a few, but in my State, you had absolutely, positively no chance whatsoever of getting one approved. So they didn't really die off, there was a defacto moratorium on them for a couple of years, followed by an outright ban in late 2005. If this never happened, they would probably have overwhelmed the game, and it would in no way resemble what it does today.

[+chuck5726]

Micros are fun and they have their place, but here's my situation. Someone has placed a series of micros throughout my area. Their is a war memorial to honor our fallen comrads. 300 feet away is a micro. I would love to put a regular cache at this spot so that people could find and then look up and say wow. Instead they are going to a phone booth. Their is a beautiful gazebo that was donated to the town by a young girl that her entire family lost their lives in a house fire and she was raised by her grandparents. This would be a great place to put a regular cache. but NOOOO..... 189 feet on the other side of a brick wall attached to a light pole out of site of this fine memorial is a micro another in this guys series. Micros are o.k. but dont saturate an entire town with them.... I'm done with that... Sorry.

[+chuck5726]

I feel better now.....

Edited October 16, 2008 by chuck5726

[+swfirefly]

This is not to cause a flame war or anything like that ,there has been to many on this subject, but maybe the OP can tell us the reasons for theirs hides

 

6 micros

1 smalls

2 regular

 

What were their reasons for hiding mostly micros ?

 

Respectably

 

Joe

 

BTW , I like all types of caches especially virtuals

You make a very valid point Joe!

 

I don't mind the micros. Some of my most fun and interesting finds have been micros. I prefer a good mix, so I scan the caches and go for the ones that appeal most to me that day. Some days I'm in the mood for a long hike thru the woods. Other days, I just want to pick up a few quickies.

 

Cache on!!

[+Parabola]

I haven't been around since virtuals where still going so they where all ready gone but didn't they end those because the where being placed where containers could have gone and there wasn't an opportunity to trade swag and the sheer number in what they where being placed? So they nixed them and eventually created Waymarking.com.

 

Could one compair the over-doing it with placing micro's to that??

 

This is a serious question with no angst attached. I just wish to know how the virtuals died and it this is correct then wouldn't eventually micro's be doing the same thing? The only difference is you are placing a container. But that container can't hold any swag in, and people sticking them on anything and everything.

 

 

You were supposed to ignore my post! Some have argued that the end of "cheap and dirty virtuals" resulted in the proliferation of "cheap and dirty micros", but I have no idea if that's were Fizzy is headed, I may be way off base.

 

I've been around over 5 years, and the unabashed virtual era even pre-dates me!! So only the oldest of the old school were around. It was May 2003 (someone can correct me if I'm wrong by a month or two) that they nixed them, but technically still allowed them if they met the "Wow factor". Problem is, no one ever defined the "Wow factor".

 

Some reviewers would still allow a few, but in my State, you had absolutely, positively no chance whatsoever of getting one approved. So they didn't really die off, there was a defacto moratorium on them for a couple of years, followed by an outright ban in late 2005. If this never happened, they would probably have overwhelmed the game, and it would in no way resemble what it does today.

 

Opps... I didn't mean your post specifically, just wondering if this is how the virtuals died and wondering could or should that be compared to too many micro's being placed instead of larger containers and what could happen if the trend continues...I don't know for sure but from what I've picked up this is how the virtual's died.

 

Just wondering is all. I look forward to Fizzymagic's explanation about the guidelines encouraging the hides.

[+sbell111]

I haven't been around since virtuals where still going so they where all ready gone but didn't they end those because the where being placed where containers could have gone and there wasn't an opportunity to trade swag and the sheer number in what they where being placed? So they nixed them and eventually created Waymarking.com. ...

That's not why they were done away with.

[+the pooks]

That's not why they were done away with.

 

Can someone explain why virtuals were stopped (or point to some threads on the topic). I haven't been caching long enough to know the history. Thanks

[+tozainamboku]

That's not why they were done away with.

 

Can someone explain why virtuals were stopped (or point to some threads on the topic). I haven't been caching long enough to know the history. Thanks

The simple reason is that Groundspeak decided that Waymarking is a better place for listing virtual caches. A more complete explanation with the history is here.

[+sbell111]

That's not why they were done away with.

Can someone explain why virtuals were stopped (or point to some threads on the topic). I haven't been caching long enough to know the history. Thanks

The simple reason is that Groundspeak decided that Waymarking is a better place for listing virtual caches. A more complete explanation with the history is here.

I actually remember the reverse of that. Waymarking was created to house the virtual/locationless concepts which weren't fitting in at GC.com. Per Jeremy:

We are actively pursuing a solution to virtual caches that will allow you to continue to enjoy this sister activity, along with locationless caches. But they will be a different animal, and IMO with more appropriate tools to manage them.

I think Jeremy also explained why virts went away with this concise statement:

The whole basis of geocaching is to find a container hidden for someone else to find.

They also created problems with land managers who, when asked for permission to place a cache, would happily dodge the issue by suggesting a virt, instead.

[+tozainamboku]

That's not why they were done away with.

Can someone explain why virtuals were stopped (or point to some threads on the topic). I haven't been caching long enough to know the history. Thanks

The simple reason is that Groundspeak decided that to create Waymarking is a better place solution for listing virtual and locationless caches and called it Waymarking. A more complete explanation with the history is here.

I actually remember the reverse of that. Waymarking was created to house the virtual/locationless concepts which weren't fitting in at GC.com. Per Jeremy:

We are actively pursuing a solution to virtual caches that will allow you to continue to enjoy this sister activity, along with locationless caches. But they will be a different animal, and IMO with more appropriate tools to manage them.

I think Jeremy also explained why virts went away with this concise statement:

The whole basis of geocaching is to find a container hidden for someone else to find.

They also created problems with land managers who, when asked for permission to place a cache, would happily dodge the issue by suggesting a virt, instead.

fixed. If you read the longer explanation that I linked to you would see I agree with your comments.

[+TrailGators]

They also created problems with land managers who, when asked for permission to place a cache, would happily dodge the issue by suggesting a virt, instead.

Too bad, because we are only allowed to hide Earthcaches in the largest state park in the lower 48. ABDSP now only allows virtuals and Earthcaches in their park.

[+sbell111]

That's not why they were done away with.

Can someone explain why virtuals were stopped (or point to some threads on the topic). I haven't been caching long enough to know the history. Thanks

The simple reason is that Groundspeak decided that to create Waymarking is a better place solution for listing virtual and locationless caches and called it Waymarking. A more complete explanation with the history is here.

I actually remember the reverse of that. Waymarking was created to house the virtual/locationless concepts which weren't fitting in at GC.com. Per Jeremy:

We are actively pursuing a solution to virtual caches that will allow you to continue to enjoy this sister activity, along with locationless caches. But they will be a different animal, and IMO with more appropriate tools to manage them.

I think Jeremy also explained why virts went away with this concise statement:

The whole basis of geocaching is to find a container hidden for someone else to find.

They also created problems with land managers who, when asked for permission to place a cache, would happily dodge the issue by suggesting a virt, instead.

fixed. If you read the longer explanation that I linked to you would see I agree with your comments.

Reading is overrated.

[+sbell111]

They also created problems with land managers who, when asked for permission to place a cache, would happily dodge the issue by suggesting a virt, instead.

Too bad, because we are only allowed to hide Earthcaches in the largest state park in the lower 48. ABDSP now only allows virtuals and Earthcaches in their park.

I'm not sure that teh ABDSP issue is the same thing as I was referring to, but I am not begging for that worm can to be opened in this thread.

[+TrailGators]

They also created problems with land managers who, when asked for permission to place a cache, would happily dodge the issue by suggesting a virt, instead.

Too bad, because we are only allowed to hide Earthcaches in the largest state park in the lower 48. ABDSP now only allows virtuals and Earthcaches in their park.

I'm not sure that teh ABDSP issue is the same thing as I was referring to, but I am not begging for that worm can to be opened in this thread.

My intent wasn't to bring up a "worm." It was to show that containerless Earthcaches pose the same negotiating problems with land managers are allowed and yet virtuals are not. Edited October 16, 2008 by TrailGators

[+sbell111]

They also created problems with land managers who, when asked for permission to place a cache, would happily dodge the issue by suggesting a virt, instead.

Too bad, because we are only allowed to hide Earthcaches in the largest state park in the lower 48. ABDSP now only allows virtuals and Earthcaches in their park.

I'm not sure that the ABDSP issue is the same thing as I was referring to, but I am not begging for that worm can to be opened in this thread.

My intent wasn't to bring up a "worm." It was to show that containerless Earthcaches pose the same negotiating problems with land managers are allowed and yet virtuals are not.

Agreed. The truth is, earthcaches ARE virts.

[+TrailGators]

They also created problems with land managers who, when asked for permission to place a cache, would happily dodge the issue by suggesting a virt, instead.

Too bad, because we are only allowed to hide Earthcaches in the largest state park in the lower 48. ABDSP now only allows virtuals and Earthcaches in their park.

I'm not sure that the ABDSP issue is the same thing as I was referring to, but I am not begging for that worm can to be opened in this thread.

My intent wasn't to bring up a "worm." It was to show that containerless Earthcaches pose the same negotiating problems with land managers are allowed and yet virtuals are not.

Agreed. The truth is, earthcaches ARE virts.

That is true, but the difference between earthcaches and other virtuals is important. The big difference is that earthcaches are reviewed by independent group outside of Groundspeak. So they take the heat. Waymarking had a peer review, so the review group takes the heat. Some people get quite nasty when their cache is rejected. I'm sure this had more to do with the death of virtuals than anything else. This is also the reason they won't open up Pandora's box and even attempt a "wow" factor for traditional caches regardless of what is being hidden.

[+Moose Mob]

They also created problems with land managers who, when asked for permission to place a cache, would happily dodge the issue by suggesting a virt, instead.

Too bad, because we are only allowed to hide Earthcaches in the largest state park in the lower 48. ABDSP now only allows virtuals and Earthcaches in their park.

I'm not sure that the ABDSP issue is the same thing as I was referring to, but I am not begging for that worm can to be opened in this thread.

My intent wasn't to bring up a "worm." It was to show that containerless Earthcaches pose the same negotiating problems with land managers are allowed and yet virtuals are not.

Agreed. The truth is, earthcaches ARE virts.

That is true, but the difference between earthcaches and other virtuals is important. The big difference is that earthcaches are reviewed by independent group outside of Groundspeak. So they take the heat. Waymarking had a peer review, so the review group takes the heat. Some people get quite nasty when their cache is rejected. I'm sure this had more to do with the death of virtuals than anything else. This is also the reason they won't open up Pandora's box and even attempt a "wow" factor for traditional caches regardless of what is being hidden.

Please get back on topic.

[+TrailGators]

They also created problems with land managers who, when asked for permission to place a cache, would happily dodge the issue by suggesting a virt, instead.

Too bad, because we are only allowed to hide Earthcaches in the largest state park in the lower 48. ABDSP now only allows virtuals and Earthcaches in their park.

I'm not sure that the ABDSP issue is the same thing as I was referring to, but I am not begging for that worm can to be opened in this thread.

My intent wasn't to bring up a "worm." It was to show that containerless Earthcaches pose the same negotiating problems with land managers are allowed and yet virtuals are not.

Agreed. The truth is, earthcaches ARE virts.

That is true, but the difference between earthcaches and other virtuals is important. The big difference is that earthcaches are reviewed by independent group outside of Groundspeak. So they take the heat. Waymarking had a peer review, so the review group takes the heat. Some people get quite nasty when their cache is rejected. I'm sure this had more to do with the death of virtuals than anything else. This is also the reason they won't open up Pandora's box and even attempt a "wow" factor for traditional caches regardless of what is being hidden.

Please get back on topic.

Sorry, the point I was leading to was going to be on topic. Anyhow, the point I was going to make was that the "wow" factor experiment to stop/slow down non-wow virtuals caused all kinds of unforeseen problems. Today's micros have many of the same issues that non-wow virtuals had. The dreaded "sneaker in the woods" virtual is now a sneaker in the woods with a micro inside it. Both are non-wow. However, because of the issues with the "wow" factor implementation, there is no way that TPTB are ever going to attempt the same tactic with micros. Therefore, IMHO non-wow micros have replaced non-wow virtuals and have grown unabated for years. Finally, if non-wow virtuals were still around this discussion would be most likely be entitled "Virtuals - Why so many?" instead of "Micros - Why so many?"

 

Finally, I acknowledge that many people enjoy these non-wow micros, the same way that many people enjoyed the non-wow virtuals. So there is no angst with this post.

Edited October 17, 2008 by TrailGators

[+39chevy]

In this area (near the OP) we have two cachers with over 900 hides between them. I have not looked at all their caches but one seems to have about 75% micros and the other has 2 small and 2 or 3 unknown in the first 10 pages, the rest all micros.

I don't care what size the container is, a cache is a cache and a lame cache is a lame cache.

Edited October 18, 2008 by 39chevy

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

This is amazing! I have just visited this thread -- now up to two pages -- for the first time since it started, and I notice, to my utter amazement, that NOT ONE POSTER has dared to tell the simple truth about "Why so many micros?", and instead ALL of the posters so far, due to moral weakness and lack of moral fiber, have pussy-footed about the issue! Amazing! Well, I am here to answer the OP's question, and to tell her the truth. Here goes:

 

The simple reality behind the vast proliferation of micros in many areas is that is a Satanic plot, orchestrated to work hand-in-hand with the "sport" of accruing high find counts, the hobby of pursuing smileys, and the related Satanic enterprise of "numbers runs".

 

There! I was the first poster in two pages to have the guts to stand up and tell the truth about the matter!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[+Parabola]

This is amazing! I have just visited this thread -- now up to two pages -- for the first time since it started, and I notice, to my utter amazement, that NOT ONE POSTER has dared to tell the simple truth about "Why so many micros?", and instead ALL of the posters so far, due to moral weakness and lack of moral fiber, have pussy-footed about the issue! Amazing! Well, I am here to answer the OP's question, and to tell her the truth. Here goes:

 

The simple reality behind the vast proliferation of micros in many areas is that is a Satanic plot, orchestrated to work hand-in-hand with the "sport" of accruing high find counts, the hobby of pursuing smileys, and the related Satanic enterprise of "numbers runs".

 

There! I was the first poster in two pages to have the guts to stand up and tell the truth about the matter!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vinny you know you shouldn't have told them that. This now brings the plot to public light. The plan was working and know people just might figure out what they got involved in...