The OTHER Thanks, But No Thanks! Thread

[CoyoteRed]

If your entertainment standards are so high that they cannot be satisfied when there is even a risk you will encounter efforts left out for you, for free, by unpaid amateurs who have not been properly trained in how correctly to please CoyoteRed, then I say it is YOU who is in the wrong place.

Funny that when we first got into the hobby we were entertained on a consistent basis with few stinkers in the mix. Hmmm... Pretty much set my standard.

 

Now, tell me, what happened?

[CoyoteRed]

But for those of us that want to go geocaching instead of either Waymarking, benchmarking, or randomcoordinatemarking, we'd still prefer a guardrail cache to nothing.

What's the difference in a log-only uninspired cache and a benchmark? Heck, you might even be stepping on a benchmark finding that trache. Is it the finding? Is it the logging? The smilie? The trades? Oh, wait...

 

BTW, why are you equating guardrail caches to uninspired caches? You can give me an entertaining guardrail cache over any uninspired cache any day.

[+KBI]

If your entertainment standards are so high that they cannot be satisfied when there is even a risk you will encounter efforts left out for you, for free, by unpaid amateurs who have not been properly trained in how correctly to please CoyoteRed, then I say it is YOU who is in the wrong place.

Funny that when we first got into the hobby we were entertained on a consistent basis with few stinkers in the mix. Hmmm... Pretty much set my standard.

 

Now, tell me, what happened?

You tell me. I’m curious too.

 

Even though you and I are participating in the very same hobby, and have been doing so for almost exactly the same length of time, the disappointment you describe hasn't been my experience at all.

 

Logically, then, there must be some substantial difference between you and me, not a crisis with the hobby itself.

 

Any ideas?

[+KBI]

But for those of us that want to go geocaching instead of either Waymarking, benchmarking, or randomcoordinatemarking, we'd still prefer a guardrail cache to nothing.

BTW, why are you equating guardrail caches to uninspired caches? You can give me an entertaining guardrail cache over any uninspired cache any day.

Good point.

 

Suppose, then, that instead of "we'd still prefer a guardrail cache to nothing," he had been more precise and said "we'd still prefer the exact kind of cache that CoyoteRed is certain to despise (and then whine about in the forums) to nothing."

 

Would that have changed your response?

 

Just curious.

[Mushtang]

But for those of us that want to go geocaching instead of either Waymarking, benchmarking, or randomcoordinatemarking, we'd still prefer a guardrail cache to nothing.

What's the difference in a log-only uninspired cache and a benchmark? Heck, you might even be stepping on a benchmark finding that trache. Is it the finding? Is it the logging? The smilie? The trades? Oh, wait...

 

BTW, why are you equating guardrail caches to uninspired caches? You can give me an entertaining guardrail cache over any uninspired cache any day.

The biggest difference is in how you and I see the cache. I see a geocache that I can find instead of looking down my nose at it and seeing something "uninspired" that I want to call names.

 

The difference in a cache and a benchmark is that a cache is something that someone placed, in a hiding spot, for me to come find as part of this game I'm playing. Suggesting that there's something wrong with me wanting to find it and get the credit for the find is stupid. You wouldn't tell someone playing basketball that it would be the same amount of fun throwing the ball into either basket, and therefore they shouldn't be after the almighty "2 points" they'd get by just shooting baskets in the other teams hoop.

 

The reason I'm using guardrail caches is that's a favorite target of people in the forums that love to bash any cache they don't like. What's your point there?

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Hi.

 

My geocaching.com account name is TheAlabamaRambler.

 

Any of you who choose to send me a gift subscription will be appreciated.

 

Just sayin'.

[+deb3day]

First, if a participant doesn't like the description, or doesn't like the type (ie:nano or micro), then don't go looking for it! You can see by placement if it's a light post or in a tree at the edge of a parking lot. If that isn't your thing, then SKIP it!

 

Second, what one person finds simple could be difficult for a newbie. We all started somewhere and having some easy hides to look for is all part of the learning experience. I have a fairly simple parking lot micro that some newbies have found and said they had a hard time. No, it's not under the light post skirt. The experienced folks said it took them a few minutes, but they didn't complain, it was a find and they enjoyed looking.

 

Does having lots of finds make some people geo-snobs?

 

deb3day

[Clan Riffster]

If you succeed in limiting the hiding of caches that you don't like, you will, therefore, limit the fun of those cachers who would have enjoyed finding those caches.

I see. (I think) Are you saying, if that same LPC had been of a slightly higher quality, you wouldn't have enjoyed it?

If it's your position that you, personally, can only enjoy uninspired hides, and are incapable of enjoying quality hides, then all I can do is shake my head in wonder. Unless, of course, your previous post is just a continuance of your earlier, desperate attempt to paint me as someone who wants to eliminate certain caches. If that's the case, see my earlier post regarding quality & quantity. They are not as incompatible as you might think.

[+flask]

there's no such thing as altruism.

 

people hide caches because THEY get enjoyment out of it.

 

i fail to understand why they would enjoy having me stop my car at a poison ivy infested guardrail with no view except of somebody's household trash to grab yet another magnetic key holder, but apparently it pleases them to do so.

 

i don't consider it a gift to me or to anyone else. if anything, the one being gifted is the cache owner, who gets the satisfaction of knowing they've brought yet another person to this unique and special place.

 

you can argue all you want that every cache is a gift, but i'll have to ask: to whom?

Do you really believe there is no such thing as altruism? Or are you framing that in the context of hiding caches?

 

yes, i really believe that. we are good because it pleases us to be so. therefore, we do not act for others, but for ourselves.

 

if you have your bank teller draw up a bank check on your account so that your donation to the local soup kitchen is not traced to you, you have still made the donation because it has pleased you to do so.

 

if you have placed a cache for others to enjoy, you have done so because it pleases you to do so.

 

there is no altruism.

 

Either way, I disagree. I haven't hidden my caches for me. I hid them for others to enjoy.

 

 

i fail to understand why they would enjoy having me stop my car at a poison ivy infested guardrail with no view except of somebody's household trash to grab yet another magnetic key holder, but apparently it pleases them to do so.

 

i don't consider it a gift to me or to anyone else. if anything, the one being gifted is the cache owner, who gets the satisfaction of knowing they've brought yet another person to this unique and special place.

 

you can argue all you want that every cache is a gift, but i'll have to ask: to whom?

 

Can you PM me with a link to that cache?

 

oh, goodness, how many links do you want? i don't make this stuff up.

[CoyoteRed]

If your entertainment standards are so high that they cannot be satisfied when there is even a risk you will encounter efforts left out for you, for free, by unpaid amateurs who have not been properly trained in how correctly to please CoyoteRed, then I say it is YOU who is in the wrong place.

Funny that when we first got into the hobby we were entertained on a consistent basis with few stinkers in the mix. Hmmm... Pretty much set my standard.

 

Now, tell me, what happened?

You tell me. I’m curious too.

 

Even though you and I are participating in the very same hobby, and have been doing so for almost exactly the same length of time, the disappointment you describe hasn't been my experience at all.

 

Logically, then, there must be some substantial difference between you and me, not a crisis with the hobby itself.

 

Any ideas?

The percentage of less-than-satisfying caches has increased? I thought that was obvious. Now you tell me why?

 

Oh, wait. You've not seen that. So, you're telling me that because you haven't seen it then it must not be true for me.

[CoyoteRed]

But for those of us that want to go geocaching instead of either Waymarking, benchmarking, or randomcoordinatemarking, we'd still prefer a guardrail cache to nothing.

BTW, why are you equating guardrail caches to uninspired caches? You can give me an entertaining guardrail cache over any uninspired cache any day.

Good point.

 

Suppose, then, that instead of "we'd still prefer a guardrail cache to nothing," he had been more precise and said "we'd still prefer the exact kind of cache that CoyoteRed is certain to despise (and then whine about in the forums) to nothing."

 

Would that have changed your response?

 

Just curious.

Probably not because I wasn't referring to guardrail caches, but then again that was right there in my post.

[+Snoogans]

Does having lots of finds make some people geo-snobs?

 

deb3day

 

Absolutely not. The number of finds a person has logged has very little to do with it.

 

Not taking responsibility for one's own choices in how we spend our quality time and lack of self-awareness has more to do with it, but that's not the whole story either. For each person the formula is different.

 

I was around back in the good 'ol days of which CR speaks so fondly which were really not so long ago. There were some pretty inspired hiders back then in my area, but there are probably MORE now. Choices were few back then and the inspired caches really stood out. It was a real event when some of the most inspired hiders unveiled a new opus. People came from miles around and snapped up every other cache they hadn't yet found on the way home. Cachin' times were different because caches were fewer and farther between. Some folks got a feeling of accomplishment to have found all the caches in a city or town.

 

Today, there are far more CHOICES of caches to hunt. Too many for some to grasp, I think. SO, even though I believe there are MORE inspired hiders out there, their caches don't stand out as well, because there are so many other choices of caches to hunt closer to home. The sense of accomplishment is lessened when multitudes of caches started to fill in the available niches between. Sorta like bailing a leaky boat with a spoon for the ones trying to stay ahead of the game.

 

IMO, some folks don't realize that there IS NO staying ahead of the game and that's where they set themselves up to fail. They hang on to simpler times where choices were fewer and maintain the notion that the game has gone wrong rather than seeing the way things are going as a natural progression. For some it's just easier to complain about caches that don't meet their own personal criteria than taking the time to seek out that which they truly like to find. That's real cache snobbery.

 

There is absolutely no difference in the quality of caches today than yesterday or 5 years ago that I can see. The average caches are still average and the inspired caches while fewer by volume as they always have been are still inspired. There are just MORE caches everywhere and the inspired caches don't stick out as well. It's too easy to make the wrong choices and have a mostly uninspired cache outing and some folks rather than accept responsibility for their own choices, it's easier to lay blame at the feet of the hiders.

 

Geocaching is just high tech hide and seek. Plain and simple. Someone wanted to hide something for others to find and others CHOSE to find that thing. Anything EXTRA is a bonus and NOT to be EXPECTED lest we set ourselves up to fail.

"Failure is a hard pill to swallow until you realize the only failure you can really have in this sport is the failure to enjoy yourself."

TotemLake 4/26/04

 

The hider is playing a game called geocaching. They are evidently playing it right because their cache was approved.

 

You are also playing a GAME (sport/hobby/obsession/etc.) evidently called MY version of Geocaching 1.5, or maybe even 2.O. You seem to be failing at your game if you are not able to enjoy it. -Snoogans

 

Just remember, without the hiders, there'd be NOTHING out there for us finders to find.

[+Snoogans]

That smug superior feeling?

You say that like it's a bad thing.

 

Perhaps this is a three sided coin? I've seen both the sides you've presented, yet there seems to be another:

 

There are those among us who perceive that an uninspired cache has a detrimental effect on the game. If you don't believe that, that's OK, as you're as entitled to your opinion, just as I am. As a member of this group, I feel it is important to do everything in my power to prevent the hiding of uninspired caches, if for no other reason, than to protect the hobby I love the most. One of the, (many), methods I employ is to speak out loudly, and speak out often, against hiding drivel. If this should eventually result in even the tiniest reduction in said drivel, I offer my humble apologies to those hordes who, (judging by the gobs of "TNLNSL" logs), apparently love these types of hides.

 

Perhaps another T-shirt is in order: "I'm OK, You're OK, Film canisters still stink".

 

This post makes me want to put a skirt lifter under every lamp post that is at least .1 from another lamp post in every parking lot I can find just because I can.

 

Too bad that's not my style.

[+Snoogans]

-//- I feel it is important to do everything in my power to prevent the hiding of uninspired caches, if for no other reason, than to protect the hobby I love the most. One of the, (many), methods I employ is to speak out loudly, and speak out often, against hiding drivel.-//-

 

keeping in mind that the drivel prevents the hiding of an enjoyable cache in that zone.

 

my latest multi is a 9km trail in a park. first i intended on doing a power trail of traditionals coz that would attract lots of people. but then figured, I cache for the experience not for numbers, so im going to cater for kindred spirits. plus now others can hide more caches in that park, im not hogging the entire area.

 

this discussion boils down to the same thing everytime :

if the number cacher gets his/her kicks from LPCs, he/she is happy.

if the hiking cacher gets his/her kicks from the 20km hike, he/she is happy.

 

everybody is happy, so why care?

the only problem (for those that like "experience" cache) is when a numbers caches prevents the hide of an experience cache or interferes with a multi.

i had this explained to me when i just got started and wanted to hide a park&grab. Havent hid one of those yet and now i can appreciate why I shouldnt.

 

I've issued this challenge before and no one has EVER taken me up on it. Please list 10 parking lot or guardrail caches that prevent a more inspired hide within .1 of where they exist.

 

Ummm, I don't tend to find too many long hikes or beautiful views within .1 of a Wally World or my local super market....

 

So why can't we suffer the cache to live and just ignore it if it doesn't float our boat?

 

I found a parking lot cache recently. It had the ironic title of "The Best Cache of...." I had passed this cache up nearly a hundred times previously, because I wasn't in the mood for that type of cache even though I just about live at that Best Buy. On a day when I was in a cache findin' mood I went and snatched it. Yay ME for gettin' another find and YAY hider for giving me something to do in that extra 5 minutes I hade before heading home. THAT'S PART OF WHAT GEOCACHING IS ALLLLL ABOUT in my not so humble opinion.

Edited September 9, 2008 by Snoogans

[+Snoogans]

there's no such thing as altruism.

 

people hide caches because THEY get enjoyment out of it.

 

i fail to understand why they would enjoy having me stop my car at a poison ivy infested guardrail with no view except of somebody's household trash to grab yet another magnetic key holder, but apparently it pleases them to do so.

 

i don't consider it a gift to me or to anyone else. if anything, the one being gifted is the cache owner, who gets the satisfaction of knowing they've brought yet another person to this unique and special place.

 

you can argue all you want that every cache is a gift, but i'll have to ask: to whom?

Do you really believe there is no such thing as altruism? Or are you framing that in the context of hiding caches?

 

yes, i really believe that. we are good because it pleases us to be so. therefore, we do not act for others, but for ourselves.

 

if you have your bank teller draw up a bank check on your account so that your donation to the local soup kitchen is not traced to you, you have still made the donation because it has pleased you to do so.

 

if you have placed a cache for others to enjoy, you have done so because it pleases you to do so.

 

there is no altruism.

 

Either way, I disagree. I haven't hidden my caches for me. I hid them for others to enjoy.

 

I'm sorta with flask on this point. I hide caches for MY enjoyment first and to share second. However, the the physical cache I consider to be a gift to the community as is my valuable free time spent maintaining my caches.

 

I am a blatant self promotor of my caches. Especially the one's in the Eastern Sierra. A quick run through my post history will reveal numerous links to my caches and pictures from my cache galleries.

 

I miss my home in the Eastern Sierra and one way to keep in touch through the seasons that I can't be there is to see the pictures that people are thoughtful enough to post. That is the MAIN reason I have shared so many of my private/little known haunts with geocachers. It doesn't hurt that they also leave glowing logs and favorable bookmarks as well, but my main intent was to get those pictures... for ME.

 

Here is a very recent photo from one. That's NOT me, but I sure wish I was there.

This is what GB had his back to as he signed the log near 10,000 feet above sea level....

[+sbell111]

I think that you missed the point of my previous post and KBI's.

 

If you succeed in limiting the hiding of caches that you don't like, you will, therefore, limit the fun of those cachers who would have enjoyed finding those caches.

 

For instance, many of you people who rail about 'uninspired' caches like to point to LPMs as the poster child. Well, not so long ago, I was running an errand and had very limited time. It just so happened that there was an LPM in the parking lot of the store that I needed to go to. I found it and it brightened my day. If people like you had their way, the cache owner would have been prevented from hiding this cache and my fun would have been limited.

I see. (I think) Are you saying, if that same LPC had been of a slightly higher quality, you wouldn't have enjoyed it?

If it's your position that you, personally, can only enjoy uninspired hides, and are incapable of enjoying quality hides, then all I can do is shake my head in wonder. Unless, of course, your previous post is just a continuance of your earlier, desperate attempt to paint me as someone who wants to eliminate certain caches. If that's the case, see my earlier post regarding quality & quantity. They are not as incompatible as you might think.

I think that it's amusing that you parsed my post so far down. You see, I don't think that your argument works, when my entire post is referenced. Therefore, I 'reconstituted' my post to it's previous glory. Now that it's back, I'll explain why I believe that your post's thesis is merely a red herring.

 

Many people (including you, in other threads) would argue that the LPM in the middle of a parking lot that I used in my example is lame. After all, it's just an easy to find (and log) micro placed in the center of the asphalt jungle. It's easy to find, easy to log, surrounded by muggles, and in a location that most would find disinteresting. Based on arguments used by the LPM-haters in other threads, the only way this cache could be made non-lame is by replacing the container and changing the location to someplace scenic. This, of course, would leave no easy peasey cache to be found at the so called uninspired location. The change you advocate would, therefore, have precluded me from finding any cache.

Edited September 9, 2008 by sbell111

[Trinity's Crew]

there's no such thing as altruism.

 

people hide caches because THEY get enjoyment out of it.

 

i fail to understand why they would enjoy having me stop my car at a poison ivy infested guardrail with no view except of somebody's household trash to grab yet another magnetic key holder, but apparently it pleases them to do so.

 

i don't consider it a gift to me or to anyone else. if anything, the one being gifted is the cache owner, who gets the satisfaction of knowing they've brought yet another person to this unique and special place.

 

you can argue all you want that every cache is a gift, but i'll have to ask: to whom?

Do you really believe there is no such thing as altruism? Or are you framing that in the context of hiding caches?

 

yes, i really believe that. we are good because it pleases us to be so. therefore, we do not act for others, but for ourselves.

 

if you have your bank teller draw up a bank check on your account so that your donation to the local soup kitchen is not traced to you, you have still made the donation because it has pleased you to do so.

 

if you have placed a cache for others to enjoy, you have done so because it pleases you to do so.

 

there is no altruism.

 

Either way, I disagree. I haven't hidden my caches for me. I hid them for others to enjoy.

 

 

i fail to understand why they would enjoy having me stop my car at a poison ivy infested guardrail with no view except of somebody's household trash to grab yet another magnetic key holder, but apparently it pleases them to do so.

 

i don't consider it a gift to me or to anyone else. if anything, the one being gifted is the cache owner, who gets the satisfaction of knowing they've brought yet another person to this unique and special place.

 

you can argue all you want that every cache is a gift, but i'll have to ask: to whom?

 

Can you PM me with a link to that cache?

 

oh, goodness, how many links do you want? i don't make this stuff up.

Taking altruism to the extreme, I don't think those who give their own life for the lives of others feel particularly good about it.

 

As for examples of guardrail micros covered in poison ivy, overlooking trash, , how about 5 within 10 miles of your home zip? That would probably put the percentage of poison ivy covered, trash strewn guardrail micros in your area at 2-3%. Not high, but possibly annoying (to you). A few logs mentioning the poison ivy and the trash would be nice.

 

And if you incorporate the Snoogans rule and eliminate those caches that aren't blocking a wonderful area nearby by their very existence, I'd wager the number will approach zero within a 100 mile radius of your home zip.

[CoyoteRed]

There is absolutely no difference in the quality of caches today than yesterday or 5 years ago that I can see. The average caches are still average and the inspired caches while fewer by volume as they always have been are still inspired. There are just MORE caches everywhere and the inspired caches don't stick out as well. It's too easy to make the wrong choices and have a mostly uninspired cache outing and some folks rather than accept responsibility for their own choices, it's easier to lay blame at the feet of the hiders.

Huh, not my experience at all. I'd say the number of posts about uninspired hides should tell you that that's not the case, as well.

 

While it's true there are a large number of caches, it's the percentage of stinkers you have to look at. Maybe you never did get to enjoy the same experience we did. We could simply go from cache to cache hunting everything in our path and not often get disappointed. Today, Sissy doesn't want to go unless I cherry-pick caches. Used to be she was the one dragging me out the door. "Come on! Don't you have your shoes on yet?" ~sheesh~

 

Today, it's not often that a newbie places a decent cache, at least in our area. If they do, they'll place multiple traches as well. It seems newbies want to do the bare minimum when placing a cache and the example they see as "good enough" are other uninspired caches.

 

What happened to the days when all caches had trinkets, even micros? Our first several micros all had trinkets in them. It wasn't until we to another state that we started finding trinketless caches. Today, I've not seen the first micro with trinkets. Yet, according you, nothing has changed.

 

Same with the size of the cache. Maybe we were simply spoiled early on with caches that were large enough to fit the hide, not small enough so you can fit several in your pocket.

[CoyoteRed]

I've issued this challenge before and no one has EVER taken me up on it. Please list 10 parking lot or guardrail caches that prevent a more inspired hide within .1 of where they exist.

Here's one. This is just a prime example. I could list a few more, but I don't feel like outing the cachers or doing the work.

 

You know, I'm glad IndianaLee & CrotalusRex didn't simply plop a micro under a lamp post when they did Tube Torcher. A prime example of an urban, and most importantly within .1 mile of a parking lot, cache. It was the standard by which other caches were measured.

 

...and blows your theory of not being able to hide a more inspired cache near a parking lot right out of the water.

 

Here's another cache* where the owner didn't buy into "good enough" mentality of any-old-lamp-post-will-do crowd. Again, I could list a few more just within a few miles, but you can take a look for yourself.

 

Challenge? Pfft! No one took you up on it because it was a challenge that didn't accomplish anything and was easier to beat than it was to copy and paste the links.

 

I found a parking lot cache recently. It had the ironic title of "The Best Cache of...." I had passed this cache up nearly a hundred times previously, because I wasn't in the mood for that type of cache even though I just about live at that Best Buy. On a day when I was in a cache findin' mood I went and snatched it. Yay ME for gettin' another find and YAY hider for giving me something to do in that extra 5 minutes I hade before heading home. THAT'S PART OF WHAT GEOCACHING IS ALLLLL ABOUT in my not so humble opinion.

You getting another smilie means it's okay for uninspired caches.* Okie dokie.

 

*You killing a few minutes of your time and getting a smilie doesn't require an uninspired cache.

[Trinity's Crew]

Here's one. This is just a prime example. I could list a few more, but I don't feel like outing the cachers or doing the work.

 

Same cache. Different take.

[+flask]

there's no such thing as altruism.

 

people hide caches because THEY get enjoyment out of it.

 

i fail to understand why they would enjoy having me stop my car at a poison ivy infested guardrail with no view except of somebody's household trash to grab yet another magnetic key holder, but apparently it pleases them to do so.

 

i don't consider it a gift to me or to anyone else. if anything, the one being gifted is the cache owner, who gets the satisfaction of knowing they've brought yet another person to this unique and special place.

 

you can argue all you want that every cache is a gift, but i'll have to ask: to whom?

Do you really believe there is no such thing as altruism? Or are you framing that in the context of hiding caches?

 

yes, i really believe that. we are good because it pleases us to be so. therefore, we do not act for others, but for ourselves.

 

if you have your bank teller draw up a bank check on your account so that your donation to the local soup kitchen is not traced to you, you have still made the donation because it has pleased you to do so.

 

if you have placed a cache for others to enjoy, you have done so because it pleases you to do so.

 

there is no altruism.

 

Either way, I disagree. I haven't hidden my caches for me. I hid them for others to enjoy.

 

 

i fail to understand why they would enjoy having me stop my car at a poison ivy infested guardrail with no view except of somebody's household trash to grab yet another magnetic key holder, but apparently it pleases them to do so.

 

i don't consider it a gift to me or to anyone else. if anything, the one being gifted is the cache owner, who gets the satisfaction of knowing they've brought yet another person to this unique and special place.

 

you can argue all you want that every cache is a gift, but i'll have to ask: to whom?

 

Can you PM me with a link to that cache?

 

oh, goodness, how many links do you want? i don't make this stuff up.

Taking altruism to the extreme, I don't think those who give their own life for the lives of others feel particularly good about it.

 

As for examples of guardrail micros covered in poison ivy, overlooking trash, , how about 5 within 10 miles of your home zip? That would probably put the percentage of poison ivy covered, trash strewn guardrail micros in your area at 2-3%. Not high, but possibly annoying (to you). A few logs mentioning the poison ivy and the trash would be nice.

 

And if you incorporate the Snoogans rule and eliminate those caches that aren't blocking a wonderful area nearby by their very existence, I'd wager the number will approach zero within a 100 mile radius of your home zip.

 

oh, i see. you want it to be about self-sacrifice instead of games.

 

well, there's still no altruism. if i put myself at risk in order to help others, i am doing it because it pleases me to be of service. being willing to risk all in service to others STILL has at its core an element that is pleasing to the person in question. since we have no compulsory service and people go willingly, clearly there is something they're getting out of it.

 

still no altruism.

 

why would i want to eliminate caches that aren't blocking an area? my point isn't density of these things, but rather that i do not know why a cache hider is pleased to take me to one of these places. if the cache is really for others, i'm puzzled as to why this great "gift" is a magnetic micro at a generic highway pull-off.

 

wen i make my list for you, do you want me to keep strictly to caches that have ALL of those attributes? off the top of my head i can only think of a couple that are magnetic micros in poison ivy infested guardrails with no view besides someone's trash, but if i go back in my logs, i'll be able to find a lot more.

 

furthermore, if i include only two of those attributes (e.g., it's in a poison-ivy infested guardrail but not magnetic, or it's at a poison ivy infested pull-off with no view and lots of garbage, but not in the guardrail), the numbers rise significantly.

 

as for people mentioning the PI and the trash, too any of the logs say TNLNSL and nothing else. there's even a whole set of threads about that. and here's a fun thing: often even when the cache is this bad, it is considered rude to say so in the log, so most of the logs at the PI infested guardrail micros with trashbags all around don't mention it.

 

even i usually don't mention all of that out of just a rudimentary politeness. and the last time i was at one of these things, i had solved a puzzle to get the coordinates and was vastly disappointed when i arrived at the location. if i had said in my log that it was a micro in a guardrail with knee-deep poison ivy with no view no parking place and only some litter, the owner may have considered it to be a spoiler, since these descriptor pretty much sum up the cache.

 

but what makes me wonder is why you want me to provide you with a list of these things or why you seem to believe that caches like this are somehow of better quality if they are only 2-3% of what's out there.

 

they're not. they're still caches that i have to doubt seriously that the cache owner is doing anything for the benefit of anyone else; i cannot fathom why you'd want to bring me to such a place. it's kind of like dropping a used gym sock in the collection box and framing it as a gift to the community.

[+sbell111]

The posts in this thread simply prove that attempts to limit 'uninspired' caches are silly, in my opinion.

 

Some people believe that any cache in an 'regular' location is lame. Others dislike any cache that doesn't allow trading. Still others believe that any cache that is not the biggest that the area can handle is a misfire.

 

The bottom line is that all of these caches are fine, as long as they meet the guidelines. If people don't like them, they should either get over it or work on ways to avoid those that they don't agree with.

 

There are many methods that people use to weed out stinkers. My easy peasey method is one, Clan Riffster has posted another that is effective without being cumbersome. Those that prefer caches that allow for trinket trading should simply filter out micros from their searches. That will allow them to avoid 99% of all tradeless caches.

[+sbell111]

why would i want to eliminate caches that aren't blocking an area? my point isn't density of these things, but rather that i do not know why a cache hider is pleased to take me to one of these places. if the cache is really for others, i'm puzzled as to why this great "gift" is a magnetic micro at a generic highway pull-off.

...

they're still caches that i have to doubt seriously that the cache owner is doing anything for the benefit of anyone else; i cannot fathom why you'd want to bring me to such a place. it's kind of like dropping a used gym sock in the collection box and framing it as a gift to the community.

Just because you don't understand doesn't mean that lots of us don't get it.

 

Personally, I think that the disconnect is as simple as a disagreement over what this game is. I don't believe that the purpose of the game is to see whether every other player can wow me. Rather than making every other player on the planet responsible for my happiness, I simply maintain responsibility for it. After all, I'm in a better position to decide what makes me happy than you are.

[Trinity's Crew]

I used the extreme example because you said altruism doesn't exist. Period. We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

 

As for examples, I didn't set the parameters. You did. I KNOW you were generalizing. That was actually my point. Every time lame caches are discussed invariably someone comes up with an extreme example and uses it to support their argument. Usually it's caches placed on or around dumpsters so the poison ivy covered, trash-strewn guardrail micro was a bit refreshing.

 

My point about percentages boils down to this: If you can't come up with more than a couple of examples of the cache that you used to describe a "lame" cache in the hundreds that exist within 10 miles of your ZIP Code, then they aren't a real problem.

[+TotemLake]

 

Does having lots of finds make some people geo-snobs?

 

deb3day

Snoogans summed it up pretty good. But I will add this:

 

On the face of my finds, you could say I am a geo-snob. I typically go after ONLY caches that take me on a hike of some sort. You could say that without knowing a single thing about me and be completely wrong.

 

I have stated many times to cachers I have been associated with in my area that I'm saving all the others for when I am old and feeble or when I have grandkids with me whom are not yet able to hit the trails but would like to have fun.

 

Your question suggests you are mistaking snobs with high numbers. These high number cachers look for all of the caches without discrimination. This is the antithesis of snobbery.

 

The high number finders I know have never looked at low number finders with an air of superiority. They recognize there are many variables which each player wishes to pursue. They are in fact representative of what kind of spirit this game is played in.

 

Callng people snobs can be a concious or subconcious attempt to feel superior... which coincidentally is the definition of being a snob.

Edited September 9, 2008 by TotemLake

[+flask]

I used the extreme example because you said altruism doesn't exist. Period. We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

 

As for examples, I didn't set the parameters. You did. I KNOW you were generalizing. That was actually my point. Every time lame caches are discussed invariably someone comes up with an extreme example and uses it to support their argument. Usually it's caches placed on or around dumpsters so the poison ivy covered, trash-strewn guardrail micro was a bit refreshing.

 

My point about percentages boils down to this: If you can't come up with more than a couple of examples of the cache that you used to describe a "lame" cache in the hundreds that exist within 10 miles of your ZIP Code, then they aren't a real problem.

 

since you like extremes, if i am the target of a harassment campaign, can i assume that if 98 percent of my neighbors weren't harassed or stalked that i shouldn't consider it a problem?

 

and my point isn't what a problem these things are; it's that they're not an especially fine gift to the community.

 

if i really felt like outing the number of lame PI infested hides around here, i'd give you some numbers. my reluctance to label these things and go to the trouble to make a list for YOU doesn't mean they don't exist in significant numbers.

 

and even if they didn't exist in numbers, they're still not a gift to the community. they're just a few steps below a waterlogged cereal box with painted macaroni stuck to it. at least when some three-year-old hands you one of these monstrosities, you know he was doing his best, most heartfelt work.

 

if your best "gift" to the community is a camo-taped preform bottle in a juniper bush on a highway median, you've got some screws loose.

[Trinity's Crew]

why would i want to eliminate caches that aren't blocking an area? my point isn't density of these things, but rather that i do not know why a cache hider is pleased to take me to one of these places.

 

Since you believe there is no altruism I don't understand why you are confused. They may have taken you there just to get their jollies.

 

I can see it now as cacher "X" chuckles and rubs his hands together while muttering, "Hee, hee! Another sucker waded through that sea of poison ivy just to get a smiley! What a maroon!"

[Trinity's Crew]

I used the extreme example because you said altruism doesn't exist. Period. We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

 

As for examples, I didn't set the parameters. You did. I KNOW you were generalizing. That was actually my point. Every time lame caches are discussed invariably someone comes up with an extreme example and uses it to support their argument. Usually it's caches placed on or around dumpsters so the poison ivy covered, trash-strewn guardrail micro was a bit refreshing.

 

My point about percentages boils down to this: If you can't come up with more than a couple of examples of the cache that you used to describe a "lame" cache in the hundreds that exist within 10 miles of your ZIP Code, then they aren't a real problem.

 

since you like extremes, if i am the target of a harassment campaign, can i assume that if 98 percent of my neighbors weren't harassed or stalked that i shouldn't consider it a problem?

 

and my point isn't what a problem these things are; it's that they're not an especially fine gift to the community.

 

if i really felt like outing the number of lame PI infested hides around here, i'd give you some numbers. my reluctance to label these things and go to the trouble to make a list for YOU doesn't mean they don't exist in significant numbers.

 

and even if they didn't exist in numbers, they're still not a gift to the community. they're just a few steps below a waterlogged cereal box with painted macaroni stuck to it. at least when some three-year-old hands you one of these monstrosities, you know he was doing his best, most heartfelt work.

 

if your best "gift" to the community is a camo-taped preform bottle in a juniper bush on a highway median, you've got some screws loose.

You said yourself that this is a game. Let's keep the conversation about the lame caches in the context of the game.

 

I already explained that I went to an extreme because you denied the existence of altruism. Period. I asked for clarification before I used my example. You verified that you don't believe in it in any form. At that point I wasn't talking about the game, I was talking about the existence of altruism. If you want to talk about altruism within the framework of this game you may be able to convince me that there is some give and take, but I'll never believe that people hide caches strictly for their own enjoyment.

[+sbell111]

The only thing that I've learned from this thread is that Vermont has more poison ivy than one would imagine.

Edited September 9, 2008 by sbell111

[+flask]

why would i want to eliminate caches that aren't blocking an area? my point isn't density of these things, but rather that i do not know why a cache hider is pleased to take me to one of these places.

 

Since you believe there is no altruism I don't understand why you are confused. They may have taken you there just to get their jollies.

 

I can see it now as cacher "X" chuckles and rubs his hands together while muttering, "Hee, hee! Another sucker waded through that sea of poison ivy just to get a smiley! What a maroon!"

 

believing that there is no altruism is not the same as believing that people are inherently bad. there are many people who behave in moral and kind ways, in ways that benefit others, but make no mistake: we do it because it pleases us to do it.

 

if you have committed a meaningful and selfless act but you derive any benefit from knowing you have done so, then it isn't selfless. you did it because it pleased you. there's no reason NOT to do these things that please you and in fact when people behave well and derive pleasure from behaving well, there's a real benefit to all of those touched by that behavior.

 

actually, with these goofball caches, i more envision what they're thinking is: oooh! somebody came to my cache. they're paying attention to me! they must love my cache. or, for the less advanced, i can get people to come out and sign my logbook just because i placed a cache!

 

still not a gift.

 

it's not that i can't give you examples, but that i don't want to give you examples. it's fine and dandy for me to rail against these things in general, but i do not wish to label other people's caches in particular.

Edited September 9, 2008 by flask

[Dinoprophet]

Phoebe on "Friends" believed in altruism. But when she tried to do a good deed with absolutely no reward for herself, she realized she felt good about it, defeating her argument. Poor, silly Phoebe.

[Trinity's Crew]

The only thing that I've learned from this thread is that Vermont has more poison ivy than one would imagine.

[+Cedar Grove Seekers]

Great original post! I don't think I'll ever forget this story.

 

At an event, some cachers were dissing a cache that was hidden in a pocket park as being lame and uninspired. (Mind you, this was back in the good old days and the cache was a regular sized one, just not well hidden and full of "crappy toys.") Well, the cache had been hidden by a 7 year old boy and those were his personal toys that stocked the cache. The boy's Grandfather was within earshot of the conversation, but thankfully the boy wasn't. He rounded and gave the cachers the benefit of his wisdom then scooped up his grandson and departed. I never saw them again and they haven't participated in hiding or finding another cache on that profile. That isn't the only such instance of instant justice at an event that I know of either.

[Trinity's Crew]

flask, I'm not surprised you don't think caches are gifts. You seem to believe that no one can do anything for selfless reasons. Using that reasoning I'm not sure how ANYTHING could be viewed as a gift.

[+flask]

flask, I'm not surprised you don't think caches are gifts. You seem to believe that no one can do anything for selfless reasons. Using that reasoning I'm not sure how ANYTHING could be viewed as a gift.

 

no one does do anything for selfless reasons.

 

people who behave selflessly derive some benefit from their behavior. if this benefit is only satisfaction at having done well, it's still a benefit and therefore a motivator to the behavior. the behavior is therefore not selfless; the self follow into it as soon as the desire is born, regardless of the goodness or generosity of the act.

 

recall the last time you did someone a good turn, or gave a gift. did you feel good about it? if you did, then it wasn't selfless.

 

it might have been selfless IF you made the gift AND completely failed to care, but why would you want to be divorced from caring?

 

some people, given the opportunity, will invariably wish to make things around them better. some people will look to make a positive and meaningful difference. they would do it regardless of extrinsic reward, but make no mistake: in the end they do it because it pleases them and therefore it is an act of the self. not "selfish" in the traditional pejorative sense, but it is an act of the self.

 

i prefer to live in a world where people are made happy by being generous and caring for others. to be pleased by the intrinsic value of these things is, i think, a mark of a fine person.

 

there's no shame in doing these things because it pleases you to do them, but only credit.

 

there's still no altruism.

 

your flip comments about the amount of poison ivy in vermont are unwelcome. i still maintain that any cache with nothing to recommend it besides knee-deep poison ivy is no gift to the community, even if they are not a prevalent scourge.

 

in fact the quality of cache placements in this area of the world along with the quality of cache contents is above average.

 

useless caches are useless whether they are the norm for your area or an aberration. they are still no gift to anyone and i have no idea why people place them.

 

most of the really loserly caches i have encountered are in fact not in vermont, but i am attempting to address the stupidity of these hides on a conceptual level rather than calling out specific cachers or specific areas.

 

if you as a hider feel that you would like to bring me, a visitor to your area, on a grand tour of your town's vacant lots and all your really spiffy guardrails, i'm going to have to ask "why?". more and more some bozo thinks an outing in an industrial wasteland covered with thorns and PI is a gift to us all, and i think it does a great disservice to all that some people are just universally grateful for all smilies, regardless of the lack of worth of the hide or the location.

 

a careless cache with nothing to recommend it need not be repeated over and over to be not worth my time, much less my gratitude. one is one too many and if you want my gratitude, you'll put a little thought into it and hide a proper cache.

 

some caches are gifts to the community by their absence.

[+Snoogans]

flask, I sorta get your side debate with TC but you're hammering it too hard. I don't believe it's so cut and dried, but my foot is sorta on your side of the fence there. I get it, but everyone doesn't have to see things MY way for me to feel right. The difference is I know I'm right.

 

useless caches are useless whether they are the norm for your area or an aberration. they are still no gift to anyone and i have no idea why people place them.

 

sure ya do. some folks are playing hide and seek for the sake of playing hide and seek. you refuse to see it that way because you can't see beyond your own selfish criteria for a "useful" cache. you have at least some idea why, but you refuse to accept it on anyone's terms but your own.

 

from the geocaching.com home page:

The basic idea is to locate hidden containers, called geocaches, outdoors and then share your experiences online.

 

please point out anywhere that officially states caches must be useful and entertaining to allllll comers.

 

most of the really loserly caches i have encountered

 

if you as a hider feel that you would like to bring me, a visitor to your area, on a grand tour of your town's vacant lots and all your really spiffy guardrails, i'm going to have to ask "why?". more and more some bozo thinks an outing in an industrial wasteland covered with thorns and PI is a gift to us all, and i think it does a great disservice to all that some people are just universally grateful for all smilies, regardless of the lack of worth of the hide or the location.

 

flask colored glasses..... your entitlement and expectation are showing. what gives you the right to expect so much from people who owe you nothing at all except to list their caches within the guidelines? what great endowment have you given this community that it must strive to entertain you? you must think a lot of your own caches to describe other's that aren't up to your snuff as "loserly."

 

the guidelines exist for a reason. if a cacher hides a cache within the current guidelines and maintains the cache their duty to the finders is fulfilled. ummm, until the aesthetic entertainment value guideline is written that is..... i can't wait to read it.

 

a careless cache with nothing to recommend it need not be repeated over and over to be not worth my time, much less my gratitude. one is one too many and if you want my gratitude, you'll put a little thought into it and hide a proper cache.

 

I'm a discerning cacher with less than 700 finds in 5.5 years of caching and it's established that I think quite a lot of my hides/effort to participate in a positive way.

 

That said, I don't hunt caches that are not worth my time at the moment although I may hunt the exact same cache I passed up many times over in a moment that the cache seems to be worth my time and be thankful to have it. I generally only make time to hunt caches that are highly recommended by word of mouth or bookmark or both, but it doesn't insult me that poison ivy covered guardrail cache in VT. gets exactly the same smiley value as the wonderful 15 mile hike with 32 creek crossings I did for one smiley a few years back.

 

I make no judgments as to whether or not the cache deserved to BE in the first place. A reviewer published it and that's enough for me. I make no assumptions/speculations about the motive of the hider for placing the cache. I have no need to insult umption to make me feel better about my CHOICE of a cache that I failed to have fun finding. It was still ME that brought ME to the cache location. My choice = MY responsibility.

 

some caches are gifts to the community by their absence.

 

A cache is a cache is a cache. Each one is a CHOICE plain and simple. The only dutifully reviewed and published cache that benefits the community by its absence is an unmaintained one.

[+Snoogans]

There is absolutely no difference in the quality of caches today than yesterday or 5 years ago that I can see. The average caches are still average and the inspired caches while fewer by volume as they always have been are still inspired. There are just MORE caches everywhere and the inspired caches don't stick out as well. It's too easy to make the wrong choices and have a mostly uninspired cache outing and some folks rather than accept responsibility for their own choices, it's easier to lay blame at the feet of the hiders.

Huh, not my experience at all. I'd say the number of posts about uninspired hides should tell you that that's not the case, as well.

 

While it's true there are a large number of caches, it's the percentage of stinkers you have to look at. Maybe you never did get to enjoy the same experience we did. We could simply go from cache to cache hunting everything in our path and not often get disappointed. Today, Sissy doesn't want to go unless I cherry-pick caches. Used to be she was the one dragging me out the door. "Come on! Don't you have your shoes on yet?" ~sheesh~

 

Today, it's not often that a newbie places a decent cache, at least in our area. If they do, they'll place multiple traches as well. It seems newbies want to do the bare minimum when placing a cache and the example they see as "good enough" are other uninspired caches.

 

What happened to the days when all caches had trinkets, even micros? Our first several micros all had trinkets in them. It wasn't until we to another state that we started finding trinketless caches. Today, I've not seen the first micro with trinkets. Yet, according you, nothing has changed.

 

Same with the size of the cache. Maybe we were simply spoiled early on with caches that were large enough to fit the hide, not small enough so you can fit several in your pocket.

 

Everyone's mileage varies. That's whyyy I qualified my statement. (see the highlited text)

 

Certainly, there were less micros way back when, but the quality of a micro back then is no greater than the quality of a micro now. I remember thinkin' the first skirt lifter I found was purty durn cool.

 

One of my sisters just recently found her first cache (being a skirt lifter in the hospital parking lot where my mother was in ICU) and was tickled to death. It lightened the day for her GREATLY. The rush she got was plain for me and JusMeLP (my geocaching sister from Santa Fe) to see. I had to explain to her how a faction of cachers found those types of caches uncool. Her response was, "Exactly who are THEY to ME?" There's a perspective for you to argue with. Go for it.

 

Let's put this in a different perspective. People my age (41) and older sometimes say there was less crime way back when, but really, when real departmental crime statistics are compared to today's it's the same, or just a few points more, and in some cases less. So whyyyy does it seem like MORE crime is happening? Because the media has grown and there are ever so many avenues to bring the bad news to your eyes and ears. There are MORE caches today and there will be MORE tomorrow and the next day. They all can't please everyone.

 

Geocaching has grown exponentially since it's inception. The state of geocaching today is a natural progression that many are failing to see. Every cache doesn't HAVE to be above average. They just need to be reviewed and approved. Until there is an aesthetic entertainment value guideline, arguments against cache placements based on subjective aesthetic criteria don't have a leg to stand on in my point of view and are discourtious to those that just want to participate in that aspect of the game as well as to those that appreciate those types of hides.

 

Applaude and speak favorably on the caches you enjoy and ignore the caches you chose to hunt and failed to enjoy. Heck, go back and delete your finds on EVERY cache you didn't enjoy. That'll teach 'em.

 

Some folks will get the message and try harder if they want to please you. Some won't care. And some will place an LPC within .1 of the next one in a 10 mile radius of your home just to spite you..... Because they CAN if it falls within the guidelines.

 

I've got about 1,000 micros left from ODS. If there was someone in my home community downing the efforts of noobs to participate, I'd paper the landscape with LPCs near their home coords just to work them into a froth and I'd have help. The frothier that person got the more we'd own him. See? It's no different than Fledermous going ballistic over that gift of a premium membership. He is rightfully owned by the person he allowed to provoke him.

[+Snoogans]

I've issued this challenge before and no one has EVER taken me up on it. Please list 10 parking lot or guardrail caches that prevent a more inspired hide within .1 of where they exist.

Here's one. This is just a prime example. I could list a few more, but I don't feel like outing the cachers or doing the work.

 

<snipped by snoogans for brevity. click to see the entire post.>

 

Challenge? Pfft! No one took you up on it because it was a challenge that didn't accomplish anything and was easier to beat than it was to copy and paste the links.

 

That's all ya got. Pfft!

 

If you have some criticism OWN IT. One does not 10 make. In not doing so you have proved my point from earlier in this thread. Thanks, but No Thanks is all you have. Please stand on the other side of the room with Fledermous.

 

Nope. I take that back. Take the opposite corner on his side. At least HE owned his criticism and got OWNED in the process.

Edited September 10, 2008 by Snoogans

[+chuckwagon101]

There is a sure cure for an ailing micro hidden in a poison ivy infested guardrail..............

 

Just move that sucker to a trailhead, high in the mountains of some wild area of some state! Upgrade it's poor body to a beautiful ammo can replete with matching cammo!

 

Stuff that sucker full of high-dollar items that would make a serious CONTENDER giddy with desire!

 

Then smother it all with an icing of sticks and stump bark at least two feet high! YUM! NIRVANA

[CoyoteRed]

If you have some criticism OWN IT. One does not 10 make. In not doing so you have proved my point from earlier in this thread. Thanks, but No Thanks is all you have.

Negative. I own it. I won't attempt to embarrass or ridicule additional cachers or individual caches. I'm a little sorry that I've done what I've done in the past. Just because I wont' go there doesn't mean my argument isn't valid or yours is. The only point you've proved is no one is willing to point out those caches, not that they don't exist. But, then again, mayhap from your tone, you know this.

 

No, I won't post those links just like I won't swallow the bitter pill of "thanking" someone for a junk cache. No, I'll keep silent and not log it at all.

 

As was sitting here composing this post a thought struck me. I deleted the rest of what I was going to say for this. I'm wondering if those who are so vocal about allowing any level of quality of cache, especially by those with the experience and skills to place better, and yet they themselves place decent caches, is it because they want their caches to stand out from the crowd so much they lower the overall standard of caching for that to happen? "I, Mr. Magnanimous Cacher, think all the little folk should have their little caches for their caching game. After all, if they want a good cache they can come and look at mine! See how much better my caches are than theirs?"

 

Me, I try to lead by example. I place caches along a difficulty and style spectrum of a quality that I'd like to hunt. As much as some posters like to make snide remarks about "CR-approved," or "up to CR's standards," etc., that's exactly right. Funny thing is, that standard isn't really that high and folks still won't place caches that met it. I say it's because of a vocal group that says "any ol' junk is good enough." It ain't for me.

[CoyoteRed]

Certainly, there were less micros way back when, but the quality of a micro back then is no greater than the quality of a micro now. I remember thinkin' the first skirt lifter I found was purty durn cool.

You keep skipping over the part where I say even the micros back then were better. Take a look at my history and you'll the micros back then were no skirt lifter in barren parking lots. They had trades. Contrast that with the micros of today.

 

One of my sisters just recently found her first cache (being a skirt lifter in the hospital parking lot where my mother was in ICU) and was tickled to death. It lightened the day for her GREATLY. The rush she got was plain for me and JusMeLP (my geocaching sister from Santa Fe) to see. I had to explain to her how a faction of cachers found those types of caches uncool. Her response was, "Exactly who are THEY to ME?" There's a perspective for you to argue with. Go for it.

Funny, when I see a log by a new cacher on a pretty cool cache I can't help but think, "boy, is he going to be disappointed when he finds his first skirtlifter."

 

Her perspective is she hasn't found a decent cache yet so sure she's going to be thrilled.

 

Geocaching has grown exponentially since it's inception. The state of geocaching today is a natural progression that many are failing to see. Every cache doesn't HAVE to be above average. They just need to be reviewed and approved. Until there is an aesthetic entertainment value guideline, arguments against cache placements based on subjective aesthetic criteria don't have a leg to stand on in my point of view and are discourtious to those that just want to participate in that aspect of the game as well as to those that appreciate those types of hides.

One day while I happened to be near the mailbox when the mail lady came by I asked if their was a way to get put on a "no flier" list or something. I was getting so many fliers and junk it was unreal. It all simply went directly into the recycle bin without even a second glance. So, why was I getting it?

 

Her response was there is no "no flier" list or any remedy for not getting junk mail. When someone mails a letter, flier, or parcel, and it meets all of the USPS guidelines, it gets delivered. Doesn't matter if I want it or not. Doesn't matter the quality of the mailing. If it meets the guidelines, it goes.

 

Sound familiar?

 

Okay, how about email? The same? If it meets guidelines (pretty much none) it gets delivered. There are a few companies that attempt to filter spam, but otherwise the mail goes through regardless of quality or whether I wanted it or not. My spam filter simply sends all spam to the delete box which I scan briefly for positives, and is gone without be read or further considered.

 

Sound familiar?

 

So, trache is like junk mail or spam? Where's my filter?

 

And some will place an LPC within .1 of the next one in a 10 mile radius of your home just to spite you..... Because they CAN if it falls within the guidelines.

 

I've got about 1,000 micros left from ODS. If there was someone in my home community downing the efforts of noobs to participate, I'd paper the landscape with LPCs near their home coords just to work them into a froth and I'd have help.

Sounds like a really good way to create a maggot for your community. They might not stop at picking up just the LPCs, but continue with every one of your caches they can find along with every cache of every person they think helped you or supported your efforts. I'm sure that'd make you popular.

[Mushtang]

I'm wondering if those who are so vocal about allowing any level of quality of cache, especially by those with the experience and skills to place better, and yet they themselves place decent caches, is it because they want their caches to stand out from the crowd so much they lower the overall standard of caching for that to happen?

The way I read this, you're under the impression that there are cachers that don't want to allow any level of quality of cache, as in, cachers that don't want high quality caches to be placed. Surly that's not the way you meant it to sound, is it? The only people in these forums that I've ever seen that have suggested a cache be placed are the snobs that look down upon some caches and want to keep what they think are lame caches from existing. As I see it, everybody else is happy to see any cache be placed, and can enjoy them all.

 

"I, Mr. Magnanimous Cacher, think all the little folk should have their little caches for their caching game. After all, if they want a good cache they can come and look at mine! See how much better my caches are than theirs?"

This is SO ironic considering what you write in your next paragraph about how magnanimous you are and how your caches are better than others.

 

Me, I try to lead by example. I place caches along a difficulty and style spectrum of a quality that I'd like to hunt. As much as some posters like to make snide remarks about "CR-approved," or "up to CR's standards," etc., that's exactly right. Funny thing is, that standard isn't really that high and folks still won't place caches that met it. I say it's because of a vocal group that says "any ol' junk is good enough." It ain't for me.

You're missing the point. When folks make fun of the "CR-approved", or "up to CR's standards," etc., they're pointing out how snobbish your posts have come across when you dismiss caches that don't please you. They're not commenting on how wonderful your high standards are. This is probably you see folks still not placing caches that meet your "high standards".

 

I wonder exactly how many caches have been placed where the hider thought to themselves, "Nice. Coyotered would be proud of this one."? Probably the same number as caches that you've hidden.

[Dinoprophet]

Okay, how about email? The same? If it meets guidelines (pretty much none) it gets delivered. There are a few companies that attempt to filter spam, but otherwise the mail goes through regardless of quality or whether I wanted it or not. My spam filter simply sends all spam to the delete box which I scan briefly for positives, and is gone without be read or further considered.

 

Sound familiar?

And even when they filter, you still have to check once in a while because stuff you do want sometimes gets flagged incorrectly.

[Trinity's Crew]

 

no one does do anything for selfless reasons.

 

people who behave selflessly derive some benefit from their behavior. if this benefit is only satisfaction at having done well, it's still a benefit and therefore a motivator to the behavior. the behavior is therefore not selfless; the self follow into it as soon as the desire is born, regardless of the goodness or generosity of the act.

 

recall the last time you did someone a good turn, or gave a gift. did you feel good about it? if you did, then it wasn't selfless.

 

it might have been selfless IF you made the gift AND completely failed to care, but why would you want to be divorced from caring?

 

some people, given the opportunity, will invariably wish to make things around them better. some people will look to make a positive and meaningful difference. they would do it regardless of extrinsic reward, but make no mistake: in the end they do it because it pleases them and therefore it is an act of the self. not "selfish" in the traditional pejorative sense, but it is an act of the self.

 

i prefer to live in a world where people are made happy by being generous and caring for others. to be pleased by the intrinsic value of these things is, i think, a mark of a fine person.

 

there's no shame in doing these things because it pleases you to do them, but only credit.

 

there's still no altruism.

 

Thus there are no true gifts of any kind from your perspective. People give for selfish reasons.

 

I really don't know whether you believe people can give gifts or not, but you used the "no such thing as altruism" argument to support your stance that caches aren't gifts. Extrapolating from the quasi-data your definition applies to all things so hanging your cache argument on it seems disingenuous.

 

your flip comments about the amount of poison ivy in vermont are unwelcome. i still maintain that any cache with nothing to recommend it besides knee-deep poison ivy is no gift to the community, even if they are not a prevalent scourge.

I've never been to Vermont and I have no idea how prevalent poison ivy is. I also didn't make the comment. Maybe part of your post was directed at Sbell111 but I didn't see you quote him here. I DID laugh at the comment and from my perspective it WAS funny. It sort of highlights the notion that different things can strike different people in totally different ways.

 

useless caches are useless whether they are the norm for your area or an aberration. they are still no gift to anyone and i have no idea why people place them.

 

most of the really loserly caches i have encountered are in fact not in vermont, but i am attempting to address the stupidity of these hides on a conceptual level rather than calling out specific cachers or specific areas.

 

if you as a hider feel that you would like to bring me, a visitor to your area, on a grand tour of your town's vacant lots and all your really spiffy guardrails, i'm going to have to ask "why?". more and more some bozo thinks an outing in an industrial wasteland covered with thorns and PI is a gift to us all, and i think it does a great disservice to all that some people are just universally grateful for all smilies, regardless of the lack of worth of the hide or the location.

Thanks, but I'd rather not have you or anyone else deciding what a useless, loserly cache is. And you really don't HAVE to ask "Why?" You WANT to do it. You WANT to deride the cache hider because he failed to properly entertain you. I'm all for truth in logging. I've said it here many times. There is nothing wrong with noting the presence of poison ivy around the cache. There is nothing wrong with noting that there is trash around the cache. Heck, I really don't see a problem with telling them why YOU personally didn't enjoy it. In my opinion you cross the line when you stop reporting YOUR experience about a cache and start attacking the judgment or character of the person who hid it.

a careless cache with nothing to recommend it need not be repeated over and over to be not worth my time, much less my gratitude. one is one too many and if you want my gratitude, you'll put a little thought into it and hide a proper cache.

A careless cache with nothing to recommend it isn't likely to be repeated much if ever. Of course this will boil down to your definition of "careless". I'm sure we're miles apart on that definition.

 

For the record, I don't defend lame caches. I defend the right of every cacher to place any cache that meets the guidelines. Cache quality is COMPLETELY subjective and has no place in the publishing process.

some caches are gifts to the community by their absence.

Your entitlement mentality is showing. Edited September 10, 2008 by Trinity's Crew

[+Snoogans]

I wonder exactly how many caches have been placed where the hider thought to themselves, "Nice. Coyotered would be proud of this one."? Probably the same number as caches that you've hidden.

 

Knowing CR is just the forum persona of the Sissy-n-CR profile, I HAD to check knowing the answer. Then I noted there were 6 finds all on the same day for the same hider..... Interesting... I just HAD to see for myself if the other 5 logs mirrored the one he linked.

 

Well now. Quite an ax to grind with 'ol Granpa.

 

I was of the opinion CR was a worthy adversary because he could often make me see the other side in a different way. My opinion has changed. CR, if that is truely how you operate, I'm glad you are 1,500 miles away and S.E.P.

[Dinoprophet]

I wonder exactly how many caches have been placed where the hider thought to themselves, "Nice. Coyotered would be proud of this one."? Probably the same number as caches that you've hidden.

 

Knowing CR is just the forum persona of the Sissy-n-CR profile, I HAD to check knowing the answer. Then I noted there were 6 finds all on the same day for the same hider..... Interesting... I just HAD to see for myself if the other 5 logs mirrored the one he linked.

 

Well now. Quite an ax to grind with 'ol Granpa.

 

I was of the opinion CR was a worthy adversary because he could often make me see the other side in a different way. My opinion has changed. CR, if that is truely how you operate, I'm glad you are 1,500 miles away and S.E.P.

What's wrong with removing a cache that was left behind after it was archived by an admin after multiple questions about its legality and possible vandalism?

Edited September 10, 2008 by Dinoprophet

[+Snoogans]

I wonder exactly how many caches have been placed where the hider thought to themselves, "Nice. Coyotered would be proud of this one."? Probably the same number as caches that you've hidden.

 

Knowing CR is just the forum persona of the Sissy-n-CR profile, I HAD to check knowing the answer. Then I noted there were 6 finds all on the same day for the same hider..... Interesting... I just HAD to see for myself if the other 5 logs mirrored the one he linked.

 

Well now. Quite an ax to grind with 'ol Granpa.

 

I was of the opinion CR was a worthy adversary because he could often make me see the other side in a different way. My opinion has changed. CR, if that is truely how you operate, I'm glad you are 1,500 miles away and S.E.P.

What's wrong with removing a cache that was left behind after it was archived by an admin after multiple questions about its legality and possible vandalism?

 

He isn't the law and the cache wasn't his to remove. I'm not a fan of self appointed cache police and the only cache I'd remove is one that was abandoned for more than a year and even then....

 

His logs show a CLEAR agenda against one hider. Did I miss pointing that out?

 

Not cool in my book no matter how righteous he believes himself to be.

[Mushtang]

I wonder exactly how many caches have been placed where the hider thought to themselves, "Nice. Coyotered would be proud of this one."? Probably the same number as caches that you've hidden.

Knowing CR is just the forum persona of the Sissy-n-CR profile, I HAD to check knowing the answer. Then I noted there were 6 finds all on the same day for the same hider..... Interesting... I just HAD to see for myself if the other 5 logs mirrored the one he linked.

 

Well now. Quite an ax to grind with 'ol Granpa.

 

I was of the opinion CR was a worthy adversary because he could often make me see the other side in a different way. My opinion has changed. CR, if that is truely how you operate, I'm glad you are 1,500 miles away and S.E.P.

What's wrong with removing a cache that was left behind after it was archived by an admin after multiple questions about its legality and possible vandalism?

Because it was stealing something that wasn't his, and stealing is wrong. And wrong is always wrong. (Sorry, couldn't resist this after reading all the similar posts about lies being always wrong no matter what in the bogus logging thread(s))

[Dinoprophet]

Any agenda aside, I disagree that it is wrong to remove an archived cache that is a potential legal/vandalism issue, especially when it's still being logged. And especially when the person who removes it notifies the owner and wants to return it. Looking at the logs on that one, CR wasn't the only one who thought something was amiss.

Edited September 10, 2008 by Dinoprophet

[+sbell111]

... your flip comments about the amount of poison ivy in vermont are unwelcome. i still maintain that any cache with nothing to recommend it besides knee-deep poison ivy is no gift to the community, even if they are not a prevalent scourge. ...

Actually, I made the comment about the amount of PI in Vermont, not TC.

 

You see, I was actually commenting on your many examples of PI-caches in your area. It struck me as funny that you have had so mush trouble with it, yet I doubt that I have come across a dozen caches near PI in the entire time I've been playing the game.

 

I'll admit that I am not looking very hard for the stuff, since I'm not allergic to it and that, given your hatred for urban micros it is very likely that you hunt a much higher percentage of woodsy caches than I do. Then again, I have logged plenty of guardrail caches and have never noticed nearby PI, so perhaps that is a Vermont thing.

 

Still, I thought my post was somewhat funny and hoped it would break a bit of your tension.

 

Now that I've said that, please go back to telling us how people placing caches for our enjoyment are a scourge on society as we know it.

Edited September 10, 2008 by sbell111