Jump to content

Why does caching feel different now?


Icenians

Recommended Posts

Before I say this please please please dont take offence I dont mean it to be or sound that way :

 

I just wondered if people ('old timers') realised how off putting some of this could sound to someone like me only been caching maybe 6 months or so.

 

In essense are people blaming newcomers for the problems? Are we all number whores and poor cache placers?

 

I've placed a 13 caches in my area and while none are super amazing I tend to get goodish logs, I've been to a few events and felt very welcome! I've made loads of lovely new friends... I just worry that as a new comer am I resented?

 

I so agree with Geo Kitten and that the effect of the 'old hands' putting down caching. Sure things have changed - but I am not sure that the overly negative and hopeless stance taken by the experienced 1000+ cachers is very fair on any of us who still enjoy our caching.

 

Here in Devon the cache scene is still working with a quality edge to it being preserved in most cases, however the waves of dispair being uttered by some of the old hands is dragging alot of us down.

 

The good old days were different I am sure, better - maybe or perhaps just different.

 

The regular airing of this debate reminds me of my grandmother telling me how things were better during the war years - that used to pee me off too!

 

My advice is if you don't lke it any more - stop doing it!

If you don't like Geocaching.com - switch to Terracaching and start a new.

Eitherway it is maybe time for you to put up or shut up.

 

Please allow those of us who enjoy our sport to do so without the pressure of doubt that some of you wish to put on us.

Edited by ipplepen
Link to comment

After reading the posts on this thread it seems to me like this is turning into another one of those lets start another arguement between ourselves type posts.

Why can't we all just play nicely for once? :unsure:

I'm not taking sides but it seems like this perticular thread is turning into a them and us situation....and I thought we geocaching types were supposed to be a friendly lot not a bunch of arguementitive old farts

Link to comment

Yes it does look as if it is turning into a 'them and us' theme but I will just say this:

 

Who started it?

And as a last word from me on the subject, all games/sports/hobbies/ways of life change with the times, so why not Geocaching?

Just enjoy the thrill of the hunt, whatever the size and shape of the cache you are hunting for.

Link to comment

How about honest logs? :D

 

When you find a cache that is pointless, where the cache page is just 2 lines saying 'here's another number for you in my series of 55 pointless caches' or whatever other pointless verbage in on the page, where it is a micro in the ivy on a tree in the woods, be honest. :)

 

Don't just put TFTC and move on.

 

Be constructive, never rude, but say things like "I found this micro in the woods, but was disappointed that this remote location didn't have a nice big pot to find."

 

If you find a cache that is in amongst the local fly tipping, although a clean spot is only 300 mtrs away, again say something about it, don't just TFTC.

 

There are no Cache Inspectors out there. We are it; we are self regulating in that respect. We're pretty good at praising the good ones but we shy away from being honest with the bad ones, so we only have ourselves to blame.

 

Newbies (or not so newbies) would not continue putting out poor caches if they saw honest logging, to let them know what was a good cache and importantly, what was a bad one. Right now we have got to a situation where poor caches are the norm, therefore they continue to be put out because people know no better.

 

We have ourselves to blame for the direction of our hobbie/activity/sport... :unsure:

Link to comment

Yes, people play it differently.

 

I had someone complain that my cache was too far to walk to, (just under a kilometer) so I suggested that they place a cache along the way so people would have something to find on the way to mine. They agreed and put one on the back of a sign in the parking lot.

 

:unsure:

 

Seems a fair compromise. :D

 

If they were a cache n'dasher it seems strange they bothered to walk the Km to your hide (was that the round trip or each way?) but now they have put out a quickie in the parking lot for all those lazy individuals to find.

 

But are you surprised? I regularly see people driving around the parking lot because they are desperately looking to be as near their final destination as possible and would not dream of walking a few extra yards.

 

One thing that I was disappointed to find when we moved to Nevada, was that almost all the signs are Aluminum, so I can't stick a magnetic nano on them. :)

Link to comment

Online log quality has definitely declined over the years, not just in terms of honest feedback to the cache owner. I have just picked a random cache (placed in 2001 and still going strong), and here are some interesting stats:-

  • Ten online logs from 2002 - average word count = 74.6 words per log
  • Ten online logs from 2008 - average word count = 30.6 words per log

And the 2008 stats above have been boosted by one longer than than usual log. If I take that one out (101 words), then the 2008 online logs average at 22.7 words per log. Obviously word count doesn't always indicate word quality, but aren't you fed-up of reading logs like "Found OK. No swaps, sorry. TFTC". Hardly worth the effort of the writer or the reader.

 

How about honest logs? :D

 

When you find a cache that is pointless, where the cache page is just 2 lines saying 'here's another number for you in my series of 55 pointless caches' or whatever other pointless verbage in on the page, where it is a micro in the ivy on a tree in the woods, be honest. :)

 

Don't just put TFTC and move on.

 

Be constructive, never rude, but say things like "I found this micro in the woods, but was disappointed that this remote location didn't have a nice big pot to find."

 

If you find a cache that is in amongst the local fly tipping, although a clean spot is only 300 mtrs away, again say something about it, don't just TFTC.

 

There are no Cache Inspectors out there. We are it; we are self regulating in that respect. We're pretty good at praising the good ones but we shy away from being honest with the bad ones, so we only have ourselves to blame.

 

Newbies (or not so newbies) would not continue putting out poor caches if they saw honest logging, to let them know what was a good cache and importantly, what was a bad one. Right now we have got to a situation where poor caches are the norm, therefore they continue to be put out because people know no better.

 

We have ourselves to blame for the direction of our hobbie/activity/sport... :unsure:

There are some important points here. If someone (new or old) puts out a low quality cache, and loads of people visit and thank them for it, then their next cache might be of a similar quality. If on the other hand people use a bit of honesty in their log (without being rude), then perhaps the next cache this person hides will have a bit more thought, be bigger, have better contents, have an interesting story, etc..

 

One thing that sometimes irritates me is the poor quality of the online logs that some cachers (new and old) leave after they've found a cache. I get quite excited when I see a GC.com e-mail to say someone has found one of our caches, so I load it up, have a read, and then wish I hadn't.

Link to comment

 

My advice is if you don't lke it any more - stop doing it!

If you don't like Geocaching.com - switch to Terracaching and start a new.

Eitherway it is maybe time for you to put up or shut up.

 

Please allow those of us who enjoy our sport to do so without the pressure of doubt that some of you wish to put on us.

 

This seems a little harsh. Please remember this advice in years to come when things change in your hobby.

 

As it happens I did just what you suggest. :unsure:

Link to comment

 

If you don't like Geocaching.com - switch to Terracaching and start a new.

 

This seems a little harsh. Please remember this advice in years to come when things change in your hobby.

 

As it happens I did just what you suggest. :unsure:

I joined Terracaching a couple of years ago hoping it would be the home of quality caches. Unfortunately, in the UK it's hardly the home of any caches at all and none are near me (still). I'm afraid they made a strategically disasterous move by not allowing listing of caches that are also on GC.com.

Link to comment

 

If you don't like Geocaching.com - switch to Terracaching and start a new.

 

This seems a little harsh. Please remember this advice in years to come when things change in your hobby.

 

As it happens I did just what you suggest. :unsure:

I joined Terracaching a couple of years ago hoping it would be the home of quality caches. Unfortunately, in the UK it's hardly the home of any caches at all and none are near me (still). I'm afraid they made a strategically disasterous move by not allowing listing of caches that are also on GC.com.

 

Off topic. Especially on this forum :)

Link to comment

Before I say this please please please dont take offence I dont mean it to be or sound that way :

 

I just wondered if people ('old timers') realised how off putting some of this could sound to someone like me only been caching maybe 6 months or so.

 

In essense are people blaming newcomers for the problems? Are we all number whores and poor cache placers?

 

I've placed a 13 caches in my area and while none are super amazing I tend to get goodish logs, I've been to a few events and felt very welcome! I've made loads of lovely new friends... I just worry that as a new comer am I resented?

 

I think it's extremely negative indeed, and to be honest, I don't know why I'm reading this as it's winding me up. I think a lot of people here are harbouring petty grudges against Groundspeak that they won't explain, and are being snobbish and elitist towards newcomers.

 

I've been caching just over a year. Yes, there are caches of poor quality. But no-one is making you do them. Stick to the good ones. Just because it's there, doesn't mean you have to do it. But stop being so hostile towards newcomers - it's actually very rude and quite un-necessary. I'm having as much fun as I did when I started, and my eight hides (seven still active) have been well received.

 

Lee

Link to comment

The good old days were different I am sure, better - maybe or perhaps just different.

 

The regular airing of this debate reminds me of my grandmother telling me how things were better during the war years - that used to pee me off too!

 

My advice is if you don't lke it any more - stop doing it!

If you don't like Geocaching.com - switch to Terracaching and start a new.

Eitherway it is maybe time for you to put up or shut up.

 

Please allow those of us who enjoy our sport to do so without the pressure of doubt that some of you wish to put on us.

 

Spot on. The whining and accusations here are horrible, and over the last few months what was once a pleasant and fun forum has turned into something horribly negative and political. Some people are even flouncing off and archiving all their caches, because they've taken against Groundspeak (but won't tell anyone why).

 

For goodness sake, why get so angry? Just have fun. Isn't that the whole point?!?

 

Lee

Link to comment

How about honest logs? :D

 

When you find a cache that is pointless, where the cache page is just 2 lines saying 'here's another number for you in my series of 55 pointless caches' or whatever other pointless verbage in on the page, where it is a micro in the ivy on a tree in the woods, be honest. :)

 

Don't just put TFTC and move on.

 

Be constructive, never rude, but say things like "I found this micro in the woods, but was disappointed that this remote location didn't have a nice big pot to find."

 

If you find a cache that is in amongst the local fly tipping, although a clean spot is only 300 mtrs away, again say something about it, don't just TFTC.

 

There are no Cache Inspectors out there. We are it; we are self regulating in that respect. We're pretty good at praising the good ones but we shy away from being honest with the bad ones, so we only have ourselves to blame.

 

Newbies (or not so newbies) would not continue putting out poor caches if they saw honest logging, to let them know what was a good cache and importantly, what was a bad one. Right now we have got to a situation where poor caches are the norm, therefore they continue to be put out because people know no better.

 

We have ourselves to blame for the direction of our hobbie/activity/sport... :unsure:

 

I quite agree. As the owner of seven active caches, I'm always open to suggestions and I love it when people take the time to write long logs, whether friendly or not. TNLN TFTC on its own is really unhelpful and disappointing. I make a lot of effort to write detailed logs, as much for my benefit as anyone else's, and it's a great way to enjoy the game. I see my logs as a kind of diary, and it helps me to remember what I was doing.

 

Lee

Link to comment

Before I say this please please please dont take offence I dont mean it to be or sound that way :

 

I just wondered if people ('old timers') realised how off putting some of this could sound to someone like me only been caching maybe 6 months or so.

 

In essense are people blaming newcomers for the problems? Are we all number whores and poor cache placers?

 

I've placed a 13 caches in my area and while none are super amazing I tend to get goodish logs, I've been to a few events and felt very welcome! I've made loads of lovely new friends... I just worry that as a new comer am I resented?

 

I think it's extremely negative indeed, and to be honest, I don't know why I'm reading this as it's winding me up. I think a lot of people here are harbouring petty grudges against Groundspeak that they won't explain, and are being snobbish and elitist towards newcomers.

 

Feel free to practice what you preach! If you don't like the topic, don't read it :unsure:

Link to comment

 

Spot on. The whining and accusations here are horrible, and over the last few months what was once a pleasant and fun forum has turned into something horribly negative and political. Some people are even flouncing off and archiving all their caches, because they've taken against Groundspeak (but won't tell anyone why).

 

For goodness sake, why get so angry? Just have fun. Isn't that the whole point?!?

 

Lee

 

You are kidding right? This forum has been argumentative and political for years. People have been archiving their caches and walking off for as long as I can remember. And yes, that included me once :)

 

Nobody has been getting angry on this thread, just a load of old codgers remembering back. Best to get it written down before some of them forget :unsure:

Link to comment

It seems to me as a relative newbie (200 caches over 3 years) that the thing missing is a way to ID quality. I wonder whether there could be an informal system of recommending quality caches. Once a cache has been quality flagged enough times (appreciate this could be subjective) then it gets to stick a Quality logo on its cache page. I appreciate one wouldn't be able to PQ search them or anything but it must help?

 

Don't know if one can search for the word "Quality" or "Great" in GSAK - I'm off to try after this email!

 

Sure the system could be abused but it would help. It's only us who are going to make the situation better for ourselves.

 

I for one am going to make a pledge to write longer logs to say thanks to those who set them.

Link to comment

Bookmarks!

 

That is one method that could be utilised to recommend quality caches. The problem with any system really, is the fact that it is purely subjective!

 

Oss!

 

Absolutely. Quality is very hard indeed to define. For example, a lot of people love puzzles. Some puzzle cache listings are just lists of numbers and letters and nothing else. Clearly, some people relish the challenge of trying to work these out, and the logs reflect great enjoyment of them and indicate high quality.

 

However, for me, these are a complete no-no. By no means do I just want to do drive-bys, but I don't want to do completely cryptic caches that make me feel stupid for not getting them. I know what my own definition of quality is - but it's possibly completely different to someone else's.

 

Of the 130 or so caches I've done, I don't think any were really a waste of time, but that's because I won't do a cache simply because it's there. I'll read the listing and logs and consider whether I really want to bother with it. It's the best way to decide. You all know what you like, so be selective and ignore the ones that don't look appealing.

 

This is yet another reason why honest, constructive and descriptive logs are helpful and should be encouraged.

 

Lee

Link to comment

The title of this thread is: Why does caching feel different now?

 

The thread seems to have been hi-jacked by "persons" new to the game.

 

You newbies let us old farts reminisce quietly to ourselves............. :unsure:

Yeah, but you won't do it quietly, will you? :)

 

I'm sorry, but us old codgers were quietly reminiscing until others jumped in............

 

Perhaps we can ask for an "Old Farts" forum, at least then we will not be bombarded by the perrenial "What GPS", "What should I use for paperless caching", How many cachers...", "What do other cachers...", posts.

Link to comment

I think the point about honest logging is a good one. I've tried to be honest in most of my later finds, and been negative where appropriate. I even started a bookmark list of caches I thought were disappointing.

 

A simple thumbs up/thumbs down feedback when you log would be good. That way other people could read something like "78% of visitors liked this cache". Just very simple, like Amazon review ratings.

 

All it needs is...

 

 

Would you recommend this cache to other cachers? <YES> <NO>

Link to comment

Harrogate Hunters have summarised it for us very well.

For me I think its the sheer quantity of caches.

 

"I used to get excited about a new cache appearing realising that a new cache meant that someone had found an amazing place that was in the local area I did not know about and was really please when I went there and signed the log."

 

We casually look at the new caches but tend to be driven by 'let's visit an area and while we are there we can cache'. We use the caches as an unofficia guide book created by local people who know the area and can take us to great locations. Thanks for all the caches - we would not have visited here without caching.

 

It is changing and change is often uncomfortable - now we all have to decide what we want out of caching and make it happen for us!!!

Link to comment

The title of this thread is: Why does caching feel different now?

 

The thread seems to have been hi-jacked by "persons" new to the game.

 

You newbies let us old farts reminisce quietly to ourselves............. :unsure:

Yeah, but you won't do it quietly, will you? :D

 

I'm sorry, but us old codgers were quietly reminiscing until others jumped in............

 

Perhaps we can ask for an "Old Farts" forum, at least then we will not be bombarded by the perrenial "What GPS", "What should I use for paperless caching", How many cachers...", "What do other cachers...", posts.

 

Oh dear...now who's cage has been rattled then :)

Link to comment

There seems to be a small amount of nostalgia for the old days around and I just wondered what about the game the old timers think has changed.

 

Joining in May of 2003 I don't consider myself an oldtimer.

 

So what exactly are these caches of old? The caches that are still around from the early days seem to be mainly deep woods, long hikes, high difficulty.

 

Was that the mindset for that period or did the easy ones simply get recycled and seem to be the current trend?

 

Perhaps nothing has changed.

Link to comment
Online log quality has definitely declined over the years, not just in terms of honest feedback to the cache owner. I have just picked a random cache (placed in 2001 and still going strong), and here are some interesting stats:-
  • Ten online logs from 2002 - average word count = 74.6 words per log
  • Ten online logs from 2008 - average word count = 30.6 words per log

And the 2008 stats above have been boosted by one longer than than usual log. If I take that one out (101 words), then the 2008 online logs average at 22.7 words per log. Obviously word count doesn't always indicate word quality, but aren't you fed-up of reading logs like "Found OK. No swaps, sorry. TFTC". Hardly worth the effort of the writer or the reader.

 

I had a cache log come in last night that was 574 words long... and that was just a note; the cachers hadn't actually found the cache yet. I appreciate that that isn't the norm but it does show that if some cache seekers believe that a cache is worth a long report then they ARE prepared to write one.

 

As and 'old timer' (I found my first cache in 2001) I have noticed differences, most of which have already been listed and discussed in previous posts. Apart from the obvious proliferation of micros (pointless or otherwise) I'm not convinced that the caches have changed very much. There are still good and not-so-good caches being placed. The emphasis seems to have shifted away from the straightforward 'traditional' plastic box or ammo can with a lot more mystery / puzzle caches being placed now. They were few and far between in the 'early days'. That in itself is not a bad thing as it adds diversity and there are enough caches of all types now to satisfy everyone's cravings. Sure... it seems to be more of a 'numbers' game for a lot of people but so what? Peter (The Hornet) said in an earlier post that in the early days he was trying to catch up with Alex.. What Peter didn't know was that I was desperately try to catch up with him but he always managed to stay a hundred or so ahead :unsure: . Number chasing isn't a new phenomenon but it did take on a whole new meaning when a certain 'Seasider' burst onto the scene and blew everyone into the weeds when he became the first UK cacher to reach 1000 in what seemed to be an incredibly short period of time. Now the likes of DrSolly have taken even that to a whole new level.

 

The game has changed, evolved... call it what you will. Some would say for the better, others for the worse but it is one of the few pastimes that can be largely played the way want to play it... as an individual with your own goals. While it stays that way, I fail to see why there is any need for anyone to get wound up, pissed off or otherwise upset. To use that often quoted phrase coined by a much younger 'old timer' than me... "It's only a hunt for a lunch-box"

Link to comment

I am on the "something has been lost" side. I rarely cache these days, when once I would jump in the car and drive 25 miles or more for a FTF. The reason, that cache was probably the only unfound one within that distance.

 

I can't say it is different because it has become somehow less esoteric, it is because as the numbers have gone up, the quality has gone down. These days there is nothing special about the majority of caches. Now caching takes you to nowhere special, and takes you to a small container with no interesting contents. I have nothing against micros, but don't understand why they have become the norm.

 

Caching desperately needs a means of gauging quality. We used to have that in the UK, but unfortunately it has gone.

Link to comment

I have nothing against micros, but don't understand why they have become the norm.

 

Caching desperately needs a means of gauging quality. We used to have that in the UK, but unfortunately it has gone.

 

Micro's/Nano's have made a valuable contribution, in that caching can now be conducted in built up areas without causing a bomb alert (not even the most inexperienced copper is going to call out the bomb squad for a item the size of a thimble) and those that are without transport will never be able to just nip out into the countryside for a few hours, given the state of public transport. To be honest, even perfect public transport is hardly going to drop you off on a footpath in the middle of nowhere.

 

The problem we have is lazy cache setters, dropping micros in places suitable for a small or full size, the ubiquitous 'micro in ivy'. :rolleyes:

 

Everyone should remember the first paragraph of the website page entitled Hiding Your First Geocache...

 

Step 1 - Research a Cache Location

 

Geocaching is just like real estate - location, location, location! It is common for geocachers to hide caches in locations that are important to them, reflecting a special interest or skill of the cache owner. These unique locations on the planet can be quite diverse. A prime camping spot, great viewpoint, unusual location, etc. are all good places to hide a cache.

 

:laughing:

Link to comment

I just worry that as a new comer am I resented?

 

Never Kirstie....

 

You have taken the time to discover what makes a good cache, actually did a fair few before placing your own etc.... My gripe is with those cachers who do a MM and a sidetracked cache - think they're all supposed to be like that and then go around setting gazillions of them....

 

grrrr :laughing::laughing:

 

:blink: you just like my kitty :rolleyes:

 

I really have enjoyed the whole geocaching thing forum fight club and all.. And I hope that in a few years time I'll be an 'old timer' too :o

 

:D

Link to comment

I find it interesting to see there are essentially two types of answer to this thread:

 

a.) Geocaching has changed and not necessarily for the better

b.) Geocaching is just great as it is

 

It is surely significant that the majority choosing a.) are experienced cachers who know what things were like a few years ago, while those choosing b.) are newcomers like me who have no knowledge of what Geocaching used to be like.

 

As I never experienced caching before this year I obviously cannot comment.

Edited by big_bob
Link to comment

There has been much talk along the lines of "there's so many more micros these days", "no one places regular sized caches anymore".

There's certainly a lot more micros out there, but is that because there are overall a lot more caches being placed???

 

The answer, it seems, is the percentage of caches which are micros is on the up, Regulars are becoming rarer, but the percentage of small caches has remained quite static in the last few years.

 

Micros are now more common than Regulars, but still not as common as Small caches.

 

http://www.metalheads.co.uk/yorkshirecachi...heSizeStats.pdf

Link to comment

I consider myself a newbie to the sport, 18 months. Even as a newbie I sometimes get fed up with a micro, sometimes I get fed up with the location but then that is my point of view and my personnal choice. Even "Off yer trolley" series have their good points, we often use them to break a long journey for the kids.

 

When researching caches in an area you are going to visit if you take the trouble to read a the logs you can get a good idea of wether you will enjoy hunting for that cache or not. The only problem I see is that with the vast number of caches being published it makes it harder to find the good ones, but if you are prepared to look for them you will find them. We use a "good" cache as a starting point for a day out and normally end up doing the others around it as "we are in the area" and unlikely to return.

 

We have placed 4 caches out, each is different to the others, all have what I consider a good justification for having been placed, we also seem to get nice logs being posted.

 

So "Newbies" can also place good caches and everyone can pick and choose which caches they want to do. But a least there is a CHOICE. It's up to every cacher how they play the game.

Link to comment

Absolutely. Quality is very hard indeed to define. For example, a lot of people love puzzles. Some puzzle cache listings are just lists of numbers and letters and nothing else. Clearly, some people relish the challenge of trying to work these out, and the logs reflect great enjoyment of them and indicate high quality.

 

However, for me, these are a complete no-no. By no means do I just want to do drive-bys, but I don't want to do completely cryptic caches that make me feel stupid for not getting them. I know what my own definition of quality is - but it's possibly completely different to someone else's.

Ah, but living on the fringes of Surrey, you'll soon hit the point where you give in and start trying them! I've generally avoided puzzle caches in my 2 years of caching, but I've recently (within the past year - I move slowly) had a large series of puzzle caches placed near me.

 

It's just a matter of gritting my teeth, and having a sit down to stare/google them. If I'm still stuck, the owners have happily obliged to help me - although quite often cryptically.

 

Yes, not everyone's cup of tea, but the sense of achievement to solve it and then find a thoughtfully placed small-reg cache in a nice location is great.

Link to comment

When I read threads like this one I really wonder why I bothered at all. If all of the oldies want to play the game their way then please do so and don't go looking for any of the caches set by newcomers. Just continue revisiting all of your precious oldie ones. The 'game' will soon get boring for you.

I did an enjoyable small series down in Camborne, Cornwall that took us round the town, it included two magnetic nanos, 1 magnetic key keeper and a good sized box for the bonus, the nanos were placed in busy areas of the town and the fun was to retrieve them without being spotted.

Not everybody wants to clamber over hills and muddy footpaths all the time. During our holiday in Devon some of the caches set up on Dartmoor were so desolute that you needed to walk for a couple of hours to get near them only to be on a Tor with a hint that said 'Under a rock' so which one of the 3,000 rocks is that then. Maybe the 'Oldie Letterboxers' who use Dartmoor would like us to leave the moor to them but it seems that unlike some of the people on here they have a more open attitude to necomers and other people and 'games'

Geocaching is for all types of people from all different areas with different abilities and aims, so leave us be and do your thing and let us do ours.

I shall just continue in my own way searching for the caches that I want to find (I actually enjoy the hunt for some micros/nanos) and set what type of cache I think is relative to where I am hiding it.

Well good for you. That told us, didn't it!!!!!!!!

Not sure whether it did or didn't, but I have to say I am in total agreement with DrDick&Vick.

 

The newcomers actually far outnumber the oldtimers (and I consider myself to be an oldtimer after nearly four years in the game). Everything evolves - it's the way of the world. I have yet to come across a cacher who has found a Motorway Mayhem or Sidetracked cache and then gone and set gazillions - hasn't happened in this area that I've noticed anyway. There's going to be more and more quantity as people join in the game, but that does not necessarily mean a lack of quality. However, we will eventually run out of beauty spots, footpaths with less than 0.1 miles space in between caches, canals, towpaths, etc etc,but it will be a long time coming. What do we say to the newcomers when that happens? Sorry you can't place any caches because there are no quality spots left! With tools such as GSAK the old timers can easily filter out the micros, the puzzles, the multis, the drivebys, the lack-lustre caches, if they really do not want to go and find them. Newcomers are allowed to place caches too! Without them, us oldltimers will run out of caches to go and find! I will be the first to put my hand up and say "Yes I am now a numbers cacher" but I do still appreciate a canny hide, a pretty countryside stroll, a good viewpoint, a larger cache. I don't particularly like drivebys, but I won't ignore one if it pops up on my TomTom as I pass by. How many caches are there in the UK now? Over 35,000? You don't have to find them all!!! You have a huge choice now so pick the ones you really want to do and go and find them! :lol:

Link to comment

Loads of good, or at least interesting, posts here.

 

Perhaps it's all been said now, and I can see both sides (being neither old-timer or newbie, I suppose that follows). My only comment is that some old-timers are their worst enemies by falling down on the job of selecting decent caches to find. Yes, it's more effort than it used to be but they're out there. I was surprised at the Mega Event weekend that some of the local caches were only found a couple of times. In fact, one "old fashioned" cache in an excellent spot just west of Harrogate hadn't been found for just under a year when I logged it on the Saturday, and I was the only person to visit that week (OK, it did have a puzzle but it wasn't too hard).

 

So how does the disillusioned and careworn ancient mariner of a cacher move on from sitting all day grumbling it-aint-what-it-used-to-be and dagnabbit-not-another-darned-micro?

 

I was thinking about the same topic on a caching stroll through Surrey last week. I had a slight change of policy: rather than try and log every cache I had on my list I only bothered with those that sounded interesting enough. Even though there were some very close to my route, and even though I may have missed out on a few good ones.

I didn't find any real classics, but no duffers either. And with the big gaps between cache finds it had a real old-fashioned feel to it. Yes, my numbers haul could have been a lot better but not my enjoyment. Try it.

Link to comment

Interesting what HH has said,and I've been firmly in the quality cache camp but our stats don't really reflect this.

 

We've been on the LQ: trail for a while now, recently when we visit more than one LQ: that's quite a distance from home, we try and find something that will compliment, or in some cases make the trip worth the visit, tending to ignore lots of unappealing, to us, caches along the way. We really have enjoyed the day out, may-be only doing a few caches (the cost per cache is a bit scary though) but the day has been worth while.

 

One thing I have noticed locally is that a few Scout Groups have started putting out 1-1 caches with fancy names and little or no background info. It's slightly comcerning that the Scout Master is trying to use caching in the wrong sort of way, perhaps. Difficult to pinpoint why, but it just sits a little uncomfortable with me.

 

So the debate goes on, great stuff, but the majority won't be involved in it, sadly.

Link to comment

As an oldfart to an oldtimer ... this was refreshing and thank you for the level headed approach here John.....

 

 

The game has changed, evolved... call it what you will. Some would say for the better, others for the worse but it is one of the few pastimes that can be largely played the way want to play it... as an individual with your own goals. While it stays that way, I fail to see why there is any need for anyone to get wound up, pissed off or otherwise upset. To use that often quoted phrase coined by a much younger 'old timer' than me... "It's only a hunt for a lunch-box"

 

I used a PAF several months ago and was guilty as charged on the phone muttering about micros and ivy or woods with no clues .. whatever it was, it wasnt good ... The experienced cacher I phoned simply sighed and said to me "You dont have to do them, you know!" ....

 

That simple phrase sticks with me now and although I still do the same sorts of caches, now I just try to enjoy the fun and the walks ... without worrying overly about the ethics or politics or whatever ... that in the past I had been way too precious with .... Things change in life why should this game be different.

 

Happy Caching and thanks for the advice Bob - you probably saved my pastime for me :D And a public sorry for those that this old fart has upset ... ignore me .. I will probably wander away in time twitching over yet another unfound box nearby ....

Link to comment

I've been reading this thread with interest as I've entertained similar thoughts recently.

 

Our first find was not, in hindsight, a great one. In fact the owner decided to archive it because the location wasn't ideal. But to us it was wonderful because we'd managed to find hidden treasure. 150 finds later its inevitable that such hides will seem less exciting to us.

 

We've been caching since 2004 but haven't been very active in the last year or so. Getting back into it recently, I was amazed at how many caches there are in the local area. How on earth can we sort the wheat from the chaff? Reading all the logs is helpful but time consuming. I really think the website would benefit from a ratings system, but (as far as I know) TPTB have always been against it.

 

www.geocacheuk.com had a ratings system which seemed to be working well - but the site is down at the moment.

 

Caches will only get better if we make them better. With that in mind, the Another Mr Lizard Manifesto is:

 

1) To seek out caches that look a bit different/exciting/well-located.

2) To visit the less-exciting caches only when they contain a TB or geocoin we'd like to grab.

3) To make our new hides as different/exciting/well-located as we possibly can.

Link to comment

We've been round this one before (several times), but for those who've missed it so far: try here for lists of caches of interest. This is also mentioned in the pinned topics above but is easy to miss.

 

You could actually use these bookmarks, ignore the general search feature, and be back to the "good old days" in an instant! :anibad:

 

Hopefully, some of the features we enjoy in Waymarking will make their way across to Geocaching before much longer, which will also help sort out the wheat from the chaff.

Link to comment

I was introduced to Geocaching by a 2001 veteran, who regaled me tales of the old days. Although I agree that Geocaching is far from perfect now, at least we don't have to drive 60-100 miles to find one cache, walk for 5 minutes, then drive back home again. :anibad:

 

A good antidote to 2008 caching is to cache in some more remote areas. It really is like traveling back in Geocaching time.

Low (human) population density = better caches in my experience.

Link to comment

.......at least we don't have to drive 60-100 miles to find one cache, walk for 5 minutes, then drive back home again...

 

I think I have missed the point here. Back in the "old days" you had to walk for at least half an hour to be presented with some lovely scenery. :anibad:B)

The caches I was told of (they may or may not have been representative) were as I described.

Mind you, I wouldn't drive a 200 mile round trip for a 30 minute walk either. :ph34r:

Link to comment

My local experience in the UK rather than the US is that the caches of old were not too hard, too far or manily in woods. They were selected by people who wanted to share their favourite walks!

Thanks for the great walks!

 

I agree with you totally here the first cache I placed was on one of my favourite walks which I wanted to share with others. :) thats the reason I started caching not the finding but the getting there which is probably the biggest diference between the first caches put out and the newer ones.

I regard myself as a walker who caches.

I'm not at all bothered about numbers, ratio of finds to placements and all that stuff but if other people play the game that way its of no concern or business of mine. :D

Link to comment

Having been around for less than 18 months I fall into the "newbie" group. I think I understand some of what the "old-timers" are saying, but I also think it's worth considering how much the diminishing interest is due to caching changing, and how much is due to themselves changing?

 

When you've been doing something for a long time, it's natural for some of the sparkle to go out of it. It's possible you might have felt even flatter if it HAD stayed the same!

 

I'm fairly sure there are just as many good quality caches as there ever were, probably more. If that's the issue, it's just a case of being more selective.

 

If the issue is that you're bored with caching because you've been doing it too long, that's not a crime - just go and do something else that you do enjoy!

 

Rgds, Andy

Link to comment

I'm probably one of the newest newbies on this thread.

 

And I understand where the 'oldies' are coming from, I can only imagine what it used to be like when there was only 500 caches in the entire country. I feel the same way about some other things I've been involved with a long time.

 

Because I'm so new, I think every cache is amazing, on the basis of the sheer novelty of it being hidden out there somewhere. Although, I'm sure in a few years I'll think it was good 'back in the day'.

 

The reason I'm posting is because I agree with the quality concept, I have a cache container I want to set, but the reason I haven't yet is because I found a lot of quality caches early in my caching experiences and now I need to find the perfect place so I can live up to those caches. At the same time, I also think the quantity is a good thing, because it gives the competitive people a reason to do the sport and caters for them and sometimes I may just want to boost my 'score'. If it doesn't stike the right balance of exclusivity and mainstream appeal, it would eventually fade away wouldn't it?

 

A better system for determining the quality of caches is needed, like an Amazon style system as the above poster mentions. If it was easier to refine your searches to determine the exact type of caches you're interested in, then it would make it far easier to suit the game to your needs. This would also require people to accurately represent their cache in their descriptions, which has yet to happen with any subject on any part of the Internet.

 

Erm... That's all I've got... :santa:

 

Please forgive my newbie forum post :)

We all have to start from some point of blissful ignorance :)

Link to comment

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...