Jump to content

Micros, micros, and more micros


Recommended Posts

I know that people love these because they have said so.
Wow... sbell111 says people love micros, it must be so! <_<

 

That's like saying "I know that people love sardines because they have said so."

 

Looking at the discussions that take place here, it seems to me a lot more people come in here starting threads about how micros are bad than "I love micro" threads.

Are you really taking the position that all cachers dislike micros and that those people who say that they like them are lying? Really?

 

Wouldn't a good reason for the disparity between the number of 'I hate micros' threads and 'I like micros' threads be the simple fact that forums tend to reward whiners?

 

BTW, the fact that some people love sardines can be proven. Not only do we know that some people like sardines because they say so, the very fact that lots of sardines are sold each year proves that people like them (since people can generally choose to buy something else instead). That's a pretty good analogy for micros right there, although I generally prefer coffee bean- or ice cream-based analogies.

 

The greatest thing about geocaching is the variety of hides and hiders out there. The trick is figuring out what you want to hunt on a particular day and who has hid those cache where you want to go caching.
Indeed variety is nice. Unfortunately in many areas there is little variety.
I agree. Your area definitely needs more P&G micros. Someone needs to get on that. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

Four or five new caches per week pretty much guarantees that you won't run out of caches to look for. Of course, if you did run out of caches in your PQs using the method that I discussed earlier in the thread, you could take a closer look at those micros that were placed prior to implementation of The Method. This review would no doubt turn up more interesting caches to look for. If you were one day to run out of all the caches in your PQs and you ran out of potential good caches in the 'older micro' subset, you could do a few things. You could 1) Look for caches further away, 2) Look for some of those micros that you had been putting off, or 3) hide a few caches. Hiding caches that you like to find often spurs other people to hide similar caches.

 

I significantly underestimated the number of new caches in my area. Since the beginning of the year there were only 10 new caches placed with 25 miles of where I live. I've already found three of them and I placed one of them myself.

 

I am already looking for caches "further away". The last time I found more than 5 caches in a single day I drove 18 miles to get to the first one, then took a drive around a large lake to the west of me, finding caches along the route I took around the lake. I ended up with 20 finds (and no DNFs), drove about 120 miles and was out about 5 hours. It's extremely rare that I can get five hours out of the house to go geocaching.

 

We actually don't have a problem, compared to what I've read, with an overabundance of micros in my area. There are are few cities (actually small towns) which have a greater number than my town and those towns are 30-40 miles away.

 

There are days when I might find 1-2 caches but I also enjoy days when I can find a dozen or so. The days when I can find more than a handful of caches are becoming fewer and farther between due to the distance I have to travel and amount of time I have available.

 

I still hold firmly to the belief that the cache density where one lives trumps almost anything else when it comes to how one participates in the hobby. Those that live in high density areas have the luxury of being more discriminating than those that live in low density areas. While your method may work for you, someone that lives in an area where there are only a dozen or so caches within a 50 mile radius, might adopt an approach that fits the area better.

Link to comment
Now, you wouldn't be one to contextualize on me would'ja, CR?

Of course! :D

 

maybe you live in a very cache-rich area.

Yeah, I reckon I'm pretty spoiled. :D

 

tell me how many (what %) of the new ones won't be micros. Bet?

If the new hides follow the pattern of the old ones, it'll be roughly 50% micros/unlisted (another way of saying micro around here) & 50% small, regular and large. I'm OK with that, since, as a gander at my profile will reveal, I don't find very many when I'm by myself. My typical day of caching will start with me perusing the Internet in search of something that catches my interest, then going out to hunt that cache. I may nab a few others around that one, if time and inclination allow. The biggest exception is when, schedule allowing, I cache with my wife, who actually prefers the type of caches that don't light my fire. The end result is, the locals end up hiding far more caches, of the type I like, (the aforementioned 50%), than I'll ever live long enough to hunt for.

Sbell111 pointed this out to me some time ago, which is why I no longer rail against the mere existence of crappy hides.

(though I do still mutter about it quite often) :lol:

 

I hate threads about micros...is there a way to filter them?

I think that, so long as people keep hiding lame ones, we'll continue to see threads bemoaning them. B):D<_<

Link to comment

...Wouldn't a good reason for the disparity between the number of 'I hate micros' threads and 'I like micros' threads be the simple fact that forums tend to reward whiners?...

 

You actually could use the general percentage of one to the other to figure out what percentage of folks actually do like micros. I'll bet it tracks fairly well across most subjects.

 

For example there are a lot less complaints about regular containers. I'd wager more people like them than micros.

 

But the proof is for a student looking for a thesis.

Link to comment

Micro's have there time and place but not in the rurual area's, but that is just 2 cents worth.

 

I agree %100 with the above statement

 

I was told it not the size of the cache that matters its how you hide it.

 

but then again all the guys with small caches say that :)

Link to comment
I know that people love these because they have said so.
Wow... sbell111 says people love micros, it must be so! :)

 

That's like saying "I know that people love sardines because they have said so."

 

Looking at the discussions that take place here, it seems to me a lot more people come in here starting threads about how micros are bad than "I love micro" threads.

Are you really taking the position that all cachers dislike micros and that those people who say that they like them are lying? Really?
Uhh... No... :anicute:

 

Stating that "people love these because they have said so" implies that all people love them. This is simply untrue.

Wouldn't a good reason for the disparity between the number of 'I hate micros' threads and 'I like micros' threads be the simple fact that forums tend to reward whiners?
An interesting theory. Care to explain it?

 

Until you do, I'd have to say the theory that actually has reasoning behind it wins out. More "I hate micros" threads=more people who don't like micros.

BTW, the fact that some people love sardines can be proven. Not only do we know that some people like sardines because they say so, the very fact that lots of sardines are sold each year proves that people like them (since people can generally choose to buy something else instead). That's a pretty good analogy for micros right there, although I generally prefer coffee bean- or ice cream-based analogies.
There is no denying that some like micros, but the way your statement was worded implies that all people like micros. That is the point of sardines.
Link to comment
However I might start excluding all caches by one particular person :)
Honestly, BlueDamsel this is your best option! Once I learn the microspew droppers I ignore all of their caches that are in my range. It takes time but it's worth it! Some of these folks have hundreds of hides, so I've been asking for this feature. I really think caching boils down to finding caches from people with similar tastes. So eliminating caches hidden by people with very dissimiliar tastes from your PQs is the way to go! :anicute:

 

Is there any way to apply your ignore list to the geocaching-google maps? There are numerous caches close to home that I choose not to look for as they don't interest me. I not looking to stop others who are interested in them, but they clutter up the map making it more difficult to find ones I would be interested in.

Link to comment
However I might start excluding all caches by one particular person :)
Honestly, BlueDamsel this is your best option! Once I learn the microspew droppers I ignore all of their caches that are in my range. It takes time but it's worth it! Some of these folks have hundreds of hides, so I've been asking for this feature. I really think caching boils down to finding caches from people with similar tastes. So eliminating caches hidden by people with very dissimiliar tastes from your PQs is the way to go! :anicute:

 

Is there any way to apply your ignore list to the geocaching-google maps? There are numerous caches close to home that I choose not to look for as they don't interest me. I not looking to stop others who are interested in them, but they clutter up the map making it more difficult to find ones I would be interested in.

Unfortunately there isn't, but I wish they would fix this. So you'll have to run a PQ with ignored caches not included and then view that PQ in Mapsource.
Link to comment
I know that people love these because they have said so.
Wow... sbell111 says people love micros, it must be so! :)

 

That's like saying "I know that people love sardines because they have said so."

 

Looking at the discussions that take place here, it seems to me a lot more people come in here starting threads about how micros are bad than "I love micro" threads.

Are you really taking the position that all cachers dislike micros and that those people who say that they like them are lying? Really?
Uhh... No... :anicute:

 

Stating that "people love these because they have said so" implies that all people love them. This is simply untrue.

I didn't take that away from sbell111's quote. He simply stated that people like micros because they say so. That doesn't mean all people like micros - because not all people say they like micros. It simply means that the people who say they like micros like micros. You could debate that these people are lying about liking micros and therefore the logic is faulty, but most people who have met someone who says they like micros would probably take them at their word.

 

Wouldn't a good reason for the disparity between the number of 'I hate micros' threads and 'I like micros' threads be the simple fact that forums tend to reward whiners?
An interesting theory. Care to explain it?

 

Until you do, I'd have to say the theory that actually has reasoning behind it wins out. More "I hate micros" threads=more people who don't like micros.

Since most geocachers don't even come to the forums to express their opinion, I don't know how you can use the number of threads for or against something as mark of how many people like or dislike it. You have a not very scientific sample. In addition, people generally start threads to complain about something. The people who like micros would only start a thread if they were complaining that there are not enough micros or that there are too many regulars. So your non-scientific sample only really shows that there are more people who want to complain about too many micros then want to complain about too few micros. The facts may be that the overwhelming number of people are perfectly satisfied with the current number of micros as compared to regulars and that a few people think there are too many micros and even fewer who think there are too few micros. sbell111 would tell you that if you think there are too many micros then ignore some of the micros till the ratio of micros to other caches you find is right for you. It is true that some people live in areas where this would leave very few caches to find. Many people in these areas, while they might prefer a higher ratio of larger caches to micros than they are finding, are just as happy to find any cache. Limiting the number of micros could in fact mean that these areas will just have fewer caches.
Link to comment

I think the greatest "evidence", (if the word could be stretched that far), for folks enjoying micros less than other sizes are the miniscule logs people tend to leave for them. Certainly there are exceptions, but the trend I've noticed has been for micros around here to have logs of less than 20 words. (sometimes less than 20 characters) When I first noticed this, I thought it was just a reflection of the fact that some folks aren't as gabby as I am, yet when I started digging deeper, reading logs these same folks have left for containers of other sizes, I saw a rather dramatic increase. That's not to say that the members of this group didn't gain a wee bit of pleasure from finding a film can in some Burger King shrubbery, (obviously they did, or they wouldn't have written "TFTC" so many times :) ), however it does suggest, at least to my rather biased interpretation, that they enjoyed the other sizes more, and their log size increased as a result of the increase in their caching pleasure.

 

That's not to say that we, (cache hunters), have any right to expect others to place caches simply to satisfy our aesthetics, but that's pretty much why I hide them. If no one hunted my caches, I wouldn't hide them, which is indicative of my belief that I hide them for others, as opposed to hiding them just for me. After all, before I started playing this game, I wasn't tossing ammo cans out into the wilds.

Link to comment

Why do the same few regulars get so bothered when people vent in the forums? Do they feel it is their job to instruct people on how to have fun? Did it ever occur to you to offer opinions that would tend to answer his questions? Maybe you should follow your own advice and only read topics that don't cause you to be so negative.

Link to comment

Having played this game for a bit over five years I have found every nearby cache. I do live in a cache rich area. When new caches are published I have a look at the cache page and decide if it is a cache I want to hunt sooner or later. Later being when I have some time and I am in the area. Sooner meaning it sounds like a fun hide and I want to find a way to get out and hunt it. Eventually I try to find them all and have always been able to figure out a way to enjoy myself when I go for the hunt and make the find.

 

When I do venture into a new area I ALWAYS read the cache pages before I go so I have an idea of what to expect. Set my expectations properly and I have a good time. Simple as that.

Link to comment
... I still hold firmly to the belief that the cache density where one lives trumps almost anything else when it comes to how one participates in the hobby. Those that live in high density areas have the luxury of being more discriminating than those that live in low density areas. While your method may work for you, someone that lives in an area where there are only a dozen or so caches within a 50 mile radius, might adopt an approach that fits the area better.
It's funny, because in earlier threads, people have stated that they used to filter the caches that they wanted to find but no longer due to the massive amount of caches to be found. Now, you are taking the position that those in 'dense' areas filter and those in 'non-dense' areas cannot.

 

I see no reason to believe that you or anyone else are forced to find all the caches in your area. When I first started playing the game, I could count on one hand the number of caches to be found within 50 miles or so. If I found all those caches, I'd do something else, perhaps play golf. Similarly, if I were to filter my local caches and come up with only twenty that I wanted to find, I would find those twenty and then do something else. I wouldn't be forced to find any of the ones that I didn't want to find. In fact, those caches would not even exist to me any more than caches that are listed only on TC.com (or the other one that currently escapes me) exist to me. (They might get in my way when I'm hiding a cache, but they have no effect on the caches that I search for.)

Link to comment
...Wouldn't a good reason for the disparity between the number of 'I hate micros' threads and 'I like micros' threads be the simple fact that forums tend to reward whiners?...
You actually could use the general percentage of one to the other to figure out what percentage of folks actually do like micros. I'll bet it tracks fairly well across most subjects.

 

For example there are a lot less complaints about regular containers. I'd wager more people like them than micros.

 

But the proof is for a student looking for a thesis.

I'm not sure that I agree with that logic. Here's why:

 

Another forum that I belong to has a very active political area. Taking a look at the threads immediately after the Presidential election, you would find tons of threads bitching about Obama, but a relatively few positive threads about him. Given that the forum itself is totally non-politically slanted and that we know that he was supported by the majority, the only reasons that I can think of to explain the disparity between complainy threads and supporty threads is that people prefer to complain and that forums tend to reward whininess.

Link to comment
I know that people love these because they have said so.
Wow... sbell111 says people love micros, it must be so! :)

 

That's like saying "I know that people love sardines because they have said so."

 

Looking at the discussions that take place here, it seems to me a lot more people come in here starting threads about how micros are bad than "I love micro" threads.

Are you really taking the position that all cachers dislike micros and that those people who say that they like them are lying? Really?
Uhh... No... :anicute:

 

Stating that "people love these because they have said so" implies that all people love them. This is simply untrue.

That was not an implication that I was making, but I understand your confusion.
Wouldn't a good reason for the disparity between the number of 'I hate micros' threads and 'I like micros' threads be the simple fact that forums tend to reward whiners?
An interesting theory. Care to explain it?

 

Until you do, I'd have to say the theory that actually has reasoning behind it wins out. More "I hate micros" threads=more people who don't like micros.

Sure, please see my reply to RK, just above.
BTW, the fact that some people love sardines can be proven. Not only do we know that some people like sardines because they say so, the very fact that lots of sardines are sold each year proves that people like them (since people can generally choose to buy something else instead). That's a pretty good analogy for micros right there, although I generally prefer coffee bean- or ice cream-based analogies.
There is no denying that some like micros, but the way your statement was worded implies that all people like micros. That is the point of sardines.
Personally, I have no clue what the point of sardines is, nor do I believe that my previous post made any inference to the likes or dislikes of all cachers.
Link to comment

Why do the same few regulars get so bothered when people vent in the forums? Do they feel it is their job to instruct people on how to have fun? Did it ever occur to you to offer opinions that would tend to answer his questions? Maybe you should follow your own advice and only read topics that don't cause you to be so negative.

I love the irony in this post.
Link to comment

Why do the same few regulars get so bothered when people vent in the forums? Do they feel it is their job to instruct people on how to have fun? Did it ever occur to you to offer opinions that would tend to answer his questions? Maybe you should follow your own advice and only read topics that don't cause you to be so negative.

I love the irony in this post.

*LMAO*

Caught that too, didja?

 

\don't it, tho?

 

~*

Edited by Star*Hopper
Link to comment

Why do the same few regulars get so bothered when people vent in the forums? Do they feel it is their job to instruct people on how to have fun? Did it ever occur to you to offer opinions that would tend to answer his questions? Maybe you should follow your own advice and only read topics that don't cause you to be so negative.

Don't let them know that their insistent need to tell a complainer that stuff actually makes them one also, seeing somebody trapped in a feed back loop is only funny for about a month.

Link to comment

Why do the same few regulars get so bothered when people vent in the forums? Do they feel it is their job to instruct people on how to have fun? Did it ever occur to you to offer opinions that would tend to answer his questions? Maybe you should follow your own advice and only read topics that don't cause you to be so negative.

I love the irony in this post.

*LMAO*

Caught that too, didja?

 

\don't it, tho?

 

~*

Yes, quite amazing! Fun!

Link to comment
...Wouldn't a good reason for the disparity between the number of 'I hate micros' threads and 'I like micros' threads be the simple fact that forums tend to reward whiners?...
You actually could use the general percentage of one to the other to figure out what percentage of folks actually do like micros. I'll bet it tracks fairly well across most subjects.

 

For example there are a lot less complaints about regular containers. I'd wager more people like them than micros.

 

But the proof is for a student looking for a thesis.

I'm not sure that I agree with that logic. Here's why:

 

Another forum that I belong to has a very active political area. Taking a look at the threads immediately after the Presidential election, you would find tons of threads bitching about Obama, but a relatively few positive threads about him. Given that the forum itself is totally non-politically slanted and that we know that he was supported by the majority, the only reasons that I can think of to explain the disparity between complainy threads and supporty threads is that people prefer to complain and that forums tend to reward whininess.

WHOA! Let me get this straight! If I read correctly, you have admitted to being a current participant in another forum that our very own? How terrible! How very sick! How unfaithful to us here on this forum! Cheater! Betrayer!

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team
Link to comment

 

Another forum that I belong to has ...

WHOA! Let me get this straight! If I read correctly, you have admitted to being a current participant in another forum that our very own? How terrible! How very sick! How unfaithful to us here on this forum! Cheater! Betrayer!

 

It's almost as if a giant gloved Michael Jaxon hand came down from above the occultation & beat 'im off!!!!!111

or sump'n.

~*

Link to comment

Bluedamsel -

 

I didn't feel like reading through every piece of vitriolic snarkiness and character assasination posted thus far, so please forgive me if this suggestion has already been proposed.

 

The way that I've found to deal with lame micro saturation is to switch my game from finding to hiding. Start hiding the caches you'd like to find. If you're like me and like REALLY creative hides, I'm pretty sure you'll find hours of enjoyment just putting them together.

 

I like historical and story caches, so I've been focusing on putting those out. Doing the research and developing the story is just as rewarding as finding the cache, because you're discovering it while you're researching. On the historical caches, it's almost like being FTF, because you're the one discovering the information.

 

I tend to like a huge variety of caches, and urban micros (and even some rural micros) have their place, especially when I'm riding around town on my bike. But I sympathize with you regarding rural ones. As a hider, sometimes it can get frustrating trying to place a larger cache at a really interesting area that's already taken up by a lame micro stuck under a pipe.

 

Get creative and cache the planet!

Link to comment
I know that people love these because they have said so.
Wow... sbell111 says people love micros, it must be so! :)

 

That's like saying "I know that people love sardines because they have said so."

 

Looking at the discussions that take place here, it seems to me a lot more people come in here starting threads about how micros are bad than "I love micro" threads.

 

That's because it's easier to b*tch than it is to do something about the problem. You see that in every day life.

Link to comment
... I still hold firmly to the belief that the cache density where one lives trumps almost anything else when it comes to how one participates in the hobby. Those that live in high density areas have the luxury of being more discriminating than those that live in low density areas. While your method may work for you, someone that lives in an area where there are only a dozen or so caches within a 50 mile radius, might adopt an approach that fits the area better.

 

It's funny, because in earlier threads, people have stated that they used to filter the caches that they wanted to find but no longer due to the massive amount of caches to be found. Now, you are taking the position that those in 'dense' areas filter and those in 'non-dense' areas cannot.

 

I have no idea what some other people wrote in other threads, but I do know what I wrote and my position hasn't changed. I don't claim to know what everyone that lives in dense areas does regarding filtering but my general observation is that those that suggest filtering by cache size are predominantly those that live in more cache rich areas than I. I also know that applying a filter by cache size on pocket queries results in fewer caches to be found within a reasonable driving distance. When that driving distance becomes greater than I can drive in the amount of time I have available to me to geocaching (which I recognize is going to be different for everyone) it essentially means I can't go geocaching. If I didn't like to go geocaching I would just stop downloading waypoints to me GPS, let my premium membership lapse, and stop logging into forums. But I *do* like geocaching, and specifically finding geocaches, so rather than not go geocaching at all I'll find some that some people do not consider ideal.

 

That works for me based on the availability of caches and how much time I have to look for them. I'm not going to suggest that my approach should be used by anyone else because I recognize the fact that not everyone has the same cache density as I nor the same limitation regarding when they can go geocaching.

Please don't put words in my mouth suggesting that I am claiming otherwise.

 

 

I see no reason to believe that you or anyone else are forced to find all the caches in your area. When I first started playing the game, I could count on one hand the number of caches to be found within 50 miles or so. If I found all those caches, I'd do something else, perhaps play golf. Similarly, if I were to filter my local caches and come up with only twenty that I wanted to find, I would find those twenty and then do something else. I wouldn't be forced to find any of the ones that I didn't want to find. In fact, those caches would not even exist to me any more than caches that are listed only on TC.com (or the other one that currently escapes me) exist to me. (They might get in my way when I'm hiding a cache, but they have no effect on the caches that I search for.)

 

I have never claimed that I or anyone else is forced to find every cache. The fact that I try to do so is my choice and has no impact whatsoever on how anyone else plays the game. I am not the one suggesting that anyone else play the game the same way that I do, but I will respond when someone suggests that how they play the game should be how I should play it.

Link to comment
... I still hold firmly to the belief that the cache density where one lives trumps almost anything else when it comes to how one participates in the hobby. Those that live in high density areas have the luxury of being more discriminating than those that live in low density areas. While your method may work for you, someone that lives in an area where there are only a dozen or so caches within a 50 mile radius, might adopt an approach that fits the area better.
It's funny, because in earlier threads, people have stated that they used to filter the caches that they wanted to find but no longer due to the massive amount of caches to be found. Now, you are taking the position that those in 'dense' areas filter and those in 'non-dense' areas cannot.
I have no idea what some other people wrote in other threads, but I do know what I wrote and my position hasn't changed. I don't claim to know what everyone that lives in dense areas does regarding filtering but my general observation is that those that suggest filtering by cache size are predominantly those that live in more cache rich areas than I. I also know that applying a filter by cache size on pocket queries results in fewer caches to be found within a reasonable driving distance. When that driving distance becomes greater than I can drive in the amount of time I have available to me to geocaching (which I recognize is going to be different for everyone) it essentially means I can't go geocaching. If I didn't like to go geocaching I would just stop downloading waypoints to me GPS, let my premium membership lapse, and stop logging into forums. But I *do* like geocaching, and specifically finding geocaches, so rather than not go geocaching at all I'll find some that some people do not consider ideal.

 

That works for me based on the availability of caches and how much time I have to look for them. I'm not going to suggest that my approach should be used by anyone else because I recognize the fact that not everyone has the same cache density as I nor the same limitation regarding when they can go geocaching.

Please don't put words in my mouth suggesting that I am claiming otherwise.

I see no reason to believe that you or anyone else are forced to find all the caches in your area. When I first started playing the game, I could count on one hand the number of caches to be found within 50 miles or so. If I found all those caches, I'd do something else, perhaps play golf. Similarly, if I were to filter my local caches and come up with only twenty that I wanted to find, I would find those twenty and then do something else. I wouldn't be forced to find any of the ones that I didn't want to find. In fact, those caches would not even exist to me any more than caches that are listed only on TC.com (or the other one that currently escapes me) exist to me. (They might get in my way when I'm hiding a cache, but they have no effect on the caches that I search for.)
I have never claimed that I or anyone else is forced to find every cache. The fact that I try to do so is my choice and has no impact whatsoever on how anyone else plays the game. I am not the one suggesting that anyone else play the game the same way that I do, but I will respond when someone suggests that how they play the game should be how I should play it.
Gosh. I thought that I had a handle on your position and now I must admit that I have no idea what it is.
Link to comment
...Wouldn't a good reason for the disparity between the number of 'I hate micros' threads and 'I like micros' threads be the simple fact that forums tend to reward whiners?...
You actually could use the general percentage of one to the other to figure out what percentage of folks actually do like micros. I'll bet it tracks fairly well across most subjects.

 

For example there are a lot less complaints about regular containers. I'd wager more people like them than micros.

 

But the proof is for a student looking for a thesis.

I'm not sure that I agree with that logic. Here's why:

 

Another forum that I belong to has a very active political area. Taking a look at the threads immediately after the Presidential election, you would find tons of threads bitching about Obama, but a relatively few positive threads about him. Given that the forum itself is totally non-politically slanted and that we know that he was supported by the majority, the only reasons that I can think of to explain the disparity between complainy threads and supporty threads is that people prefer to complain and that forums tend to reward whininess.

That's exactly why it would work.

 

Lets say the Angst/Zen ratio is 10/1 in your other forum, and that is where you had 52% support in the real world for our new prez.

Then if you had a 20/1 ratio for Micros that would tend to show that Micro's had roughly half the support that our prez had. Maybe 25% support. Hard to say but there should be some kind of correlation in the ratio.

 

Forums do tend to reward angsty topics. The controversy generates interest. Even couples don't fight over the things they agree on. Ok maybe most couples don't.

Link to comment

Why do the same few regulars get so bothered when people vent in the forums? Do they feel it is their job to instruct people on how to have fun? Did it ever occur to you to offer opinions that would tend to answer his questions? Maybe you should follow your own advice and only read topics that don't cause you to be so negative.

I love the irony in this post.

I think maybe you ought to read what irony means. :)

Link to comment

Why do the same few regulars get so bothered when people vent in the forums? Do they feel it is their job to instruct people on how to have fun? Did it ever occur to you to offer opinions that would tend to answer his questions? Maybe you should follow your own advice and only read topics that don't cause you to be so negative.

I love the irony in this post.

*LMAO*

Caught that too, didja?

 

\don't it, tho?

 

~*

I don't see how feeding someone their own advice qualifies as irony.

Link to comment

It's not so much micros I'm against, It's film cans in particular (since they seem to be the most prevalent "micro.") I wish this was an option for the sizes so I could just filter out all film canisters tied to a branch or under a Light Skirt. But that would be 95% of the caches within 10 mi of me.

 

Man, I'm sick of film canisters.

Link to comment
Another forum that I belong to has a very active political area. Taking a look at the threads immediately after the Presidential election, you would find tons of threads bitching about Obama, but a relatively few positive threads about him. Given that the forum itself is totally non-politically slanted and that we know that he was supported by the majority, the only reasons that I can think of to explain the disparity between complainy threads and supporty threads is that people prefer to complain and that forums tend to reward whininess.

That's not the only reason. How about the obvious reason that BO is doing a crappy job? Anyhow, the key to the OP's issue is what can be done to make the situation better. Only searching for regular sized containers would work. However, I still think you need to find caches from hiders who like what you like. You also need to ignore hiders who hide caches you don't like. So you need to learn about the hiders to maximize your enjoyment.
Link to comment

Why do the same few regulars get so bothered when people vent in the forums? Do they feel it is their job to instruct people on how to have fun? Did it ever occur to you to offer opinions that would tend to answer his questions? Maybe you should follow your own advice and only read topics that don't cause you to be so negative.

I love the irony in this post.

I think maybe you ought to read what irony means. :)

I believe that I used the word correctly.

Link to comment
Another forum that I belong to has a very active political area. Taking a look at the threads immediately after the Presidential election, you would find tons of threads bitching about Obama, but a relatively few positive threads about him. Given that the forum itself is totally non-politically slanted and that we know that he was supported by the majority, the only reasons that I can think of to explain the disparity between complainy threads and supporty threads is that people prefer to complain and that forums tend to reward whininess.

That's not the only reason. How about the obvious reason that BO is doing a crappy job? Anyhow, the key to the OP's issue is what can be done to make the situation better. Only searching for regular sized containers would work. However, I still think you need to find caches from hiders who like what you like. You also need to ignore hiders who hide caches you don't like. So you need to learn about the hiders to maximize your enjoyment.

I'll not have a political argument with you, no matter how hard you try. Let's just leave it with the fact that you misread my post.
Link to comment
Another forum that I belong to has a very active political area. Taking a look at the threads immediately after the Presidential election, you would find tons of threads bitching about Obama, but a relatively few positive threads about him. Given that the forum itself is totally non-politically slanted and that we know that he was supported by the majority, the only reasons that I can think of to explain the disparity between complainy threads and supporty threads is that people prefer to complain and that forums tend to reward whininess.

That's not the only reason. How about the obvious reason that BO is doing a crappy job? Anyhow, the key to the OP's issue is what can be done to make the situation better. Only searching for regular sized containers would work. However, I still think you need to find caches from hiders who like what you like. You also need to ignore hiders who hide caches you don't like. So you need to learn about the hiders to maximize your enjoyment.

I'll not have a political argument with you, no matter how hard you try. Let's just leave it with the fact that you misread my post.

My point was that there are valid reasons for complaining. If nobody complained then nothing would change.
Link to comment
Another forum that I belong to has a very active political area. Taking a look at the threads immediately after the Presidential election, you would find tons of threads bitching about Obama, but a relatively few positive threads about him. Given that the forum itself is totally non-politically slanted and that we know that he was supported by the majority, the only reasons that I can think of to explain the disparity between complainy threads and supporty threads is that people prefer to complain and that forums tend to reward whininess.

That's not the only reason. How about the obvious reason that BO is doing a crappy job? Anyhow, the key to the OP's issue is what can be done to make the situation better. Only searching for regular sized containers would work. However, I still think you need to find caches from hiders who like what you like. You also need to ignore hiders who hide caches you don't like. So you need to learn about the hiders to maximize your enjoyment.

I'll not have a political argument with you, no matter how hard you try. Let's just leave it with the fact that you misread my post.

My point was that there are valid reasons for complaining. If nobody complained then nothing would change.

How could anything change at that point in time? He wasn't even President yet.

 

My point remains. We had a good statistic on how the general population felt about him, yet the threads skewed wildly in the opposite direction. The only reasonable explanations for this are that people like to complain and that forums reward this.

Link to comment

... We had a good statistic on how the general population felt about him, yet the threads skewed wildly in the opposite direction. The only reasonable explanations for this are that people like to complain and that forums reward this.

 

This is no different than the fact that a happy customer doesn't advertise much, but an unhappy one tells all to their friends and anyone else who will listen. You can still get a feel for the real numbers if you could figure out the relationship. It's not 1:1 Closer to 1:100 happy and 1:10 peeved. So 1 happy post and 10 peeved posts would be 100 happy folks in the wild and 100 peeved folks. Beats me if the example ratios are anywhere near reality.

Link to comment

My point remains. We had a good statistic on how the general population felt about him, yet the threads skewed wildly in the opposite direction. The only reasonable explanations for this are that people like to complain and that forums reward this.

"People like to complain" is a pretty broad generalization. Review the angsty threads here, or in any forum. Over and over it's the same people complaining. Just at a guess it's mostly the same 20 to 30 people. Don't confuse the posts of a few with the outlook of the many.

Link to comment
Another forum that I belong to has a very active political area. Taking a look at the threads immediately after the Presidential election, you would find tons of threads bitching about Obama, but a relatively few positive threads about him. Given that the forum itself is totally non-politically slanted and that we know that he was supported by the majority, the only reasons that I can think of to explain the disparity between complainy threads and supporty threads is that people prefer to complain and that forums tend to reward whininess.

That's not the only reason. How about the obvious reason that BO is doing a crappy job? Anyhow, the key to the OP's issue is what can be done to make the situation better. Only searching for regular sized containers would work. However, I still think you need to find caches from hiders who like what you like. You also need to ignore hiders who hide caches you don't like. So you need to learn about the hiders to maximize your enjoyment.

I'll not have a political argument with you, no matter how hard you try. Let's just leave it with the fact that you misread my post.

My point was that there are valid reasons for complaining. If nobody complained then nothing would change.

How could anything change at that point in time? He wasn't even President yet.

 

My point remains. We had a good statistic on how the general population felt about him, yet the threads skewed wildly in the opposite direction. The only reasonable explanations for this are that people like to complain and that forums reward this.

The November statistic was based on belief. Now we have reality and there are new statistics to show that most people are not happy with the moves being made.

 

It's pretty simple. People complain when they are not happy. These threads are typically started by some new person complaining. Anyhow, if you read all my posts in this thread there is not one complaint about micros. Instead, I have offered these frustrated people some good suggestions because I can understand their frustration. Empathy goes a long way.... :huh:

Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment
Another forum that I belong to has a very active political area. Taking a look at the threads immediately after the Presidential election, you would find tons of threads bitching about Obama, but a relatively few positive threads about him. Given that the forum itself is totally non-politically slanted and that we know that he was supported by the majority, the only reasons that I can think of to explain the disparity between complainy threads and supporty threads is that people prefer to complain and that forums tend to reward whininess.

That's not the only reason. How about the obvious reason that BO is doing a crappy job? Anyhow, the key to the OP's issue is what can be done to make the situation better. Only searching for regular sized containers would work. However, I still think you need to find caches from hiders who like what you like. You also need to ignore hiders who hide caches you don't like. So you need to learn about the hiders to maximize your enjoyment.

I'll not have a political argument with you, no matter how hard you try. Let's just leave it with the fact that you misread my post.

My point was that there are valid reasons for complaining. If nobody complained then nothing would change.

How could anything change at that point in time? He wasn't even President yet.

 

My point remains. We had a good statistic on how the general population felt about him, yet the threads skewed wildly in the opposite direction. The only reasonable explanations for this are that people like to complain and that forums reward this.

The November statistic was based on belief. Now we have reality and there are new statistics to show that most people are not happy with the moves being made. ...
Good grief. You are either still not understanding my post or your making much too much of an effort to turn this thread political.

 

The threads that I mentioned were contemporaneous to the resolution of the election. The results of the election is a good measure of the feelings of the population, yet at the same time, therer were more negative threads than positive threads.

Link to comment
You are either still not understanding my post....
You are correct. Now I have no idea what point you are trying to make...

 

He's saying that the approval rate for the O was enough to get him elected. Call it a well placed 50% for the sake of illistration.

In forums the "O" is evil threads outnumbered the "O" is everthing we ever dreamed of threads by say 20:1. Not 1:1 like the 50% winning election results would indicate. (I know it's actually a bit higher than 50% but dang it I didn't feel like doing goofy ratios!)

 

Angsty posts win out over Feel Good posts for raw numbers but don't directly correlate with the larger world.

Link to comment
You are either still not understanding my post....
You are correct. Now I have no idea what point you are trying to make...

 

He's saying that the approval rate for the O was enough to get him elected. Call it a well placed 50% for the sake of illustration.

In forums the "O" is evil threads outnumbered the "O" is everything we ever dreamed of threads by say 20:1. Not 1:1 like the 50% winning election results would indicate. (I know it's actually a bit higher than 50% but dang it I didn't feel like doing goofy ratios!)

 

Angsty posts win out over Feel Good posts for raw numbers but don't directly correlate with the larger world.

To me the forums are like a blog. They don't favor one side or the other. I agree that the opinions in these forums are a small sample of the population, so there would be a high error rate. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that you can't get any info from the data. The problem is that someone would have to compile and analyze the data to find out if the error rate was too high. Without that info it is all conjecture. So all we can really do is just share our own personal opinions.

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...