Why does a micro have to be lame?

[meathelmet]

Some of the best caches I have found have been micros. That said some of the worst caches I have found have been micros too. It seems like every time I hear somone talking about a small cache on this site they say "lame micro". A cache does not have to be big to be good or well thought out. To be honest when I spot an ammo can 90 feet away while walking down a trail. I would rather have a challenge. ok, I'm done venting now I'm going back to work.

[knowschad]

Some of the best caches I have found have been micros. That said some of the worst caches I have found have been micros too. It seems like every time I hear somone talking about a small cache on this site they say "lame micro". A cache does not have to be big to be good or well thought out. To be honest when I spot an ammo can 90 feet away while walking down a trail. I would rather have a challenge. ok, I'm done venting now I'm going back to work.

 

They don't. As I just posted in another thread, in my experience, there are three kinds of micros. There are great micros, there are just plain ol' micros, and there are lame micros.

 

Here's the breakdown, as I see it:

 

Lame micros are ones that are no suprise after you've found one or two, they are generally film cannisters or other containers that don't stay dry and take no imagination.

 

Just Plain Old Micros are simply micros because of their size. They have been hidden with some thought, and not simply tossed somewhere because there was no other cache there. But they generally are just a simple container.

 

Great micros have a "wow!" factor of one sort or another. It may be the camouflage, it may be the hidey-hole, or it may be the place it brought you to, but one way or another, it leaves you feeling good about having found it.

[+mcrow]

Some of the best caches I have found have been micros. That said some of the worst caches I have found have been micros too. It seems like every time I hear somone talking about a small cache on this site they say "lame micro". A cache does not have to be big to be good or well thought out. To be honest when I spot an ammo can 90 feet away while walking down a trail. I would rather have a challenge. ok, I'm done venting now I'm going back to work.

 

Not all micros are lame. These are the lame ones (at least IMO):

 

a nano in a 60ft by 60ft pebble patch disgused as a pebble or any other micro that the only possible way to find them is to do it by accident.

 

Any cache can be lame if there is no other reason to be at the area other than to find the cache. Like if it's an otherwise unremarkable area or the cache is not themed for the area. Opinions will vary widely on this one.

[GOF and Bacall]

Some of the best caches I have found have been micros. That said some of the worst caches I have found have been micros too. It seems like every time I hear somone talking about a small cache on this site they say "lame micro". A cache does not have to be big to be good or well thought out. To be honest when I spot an ammo can 90 feet away while walking down a trail. I would rather have a challenge. ok, I'm done venting now I'm going back to work.

 

They don't. As I just posted in another thread, in my experience, there are three kinds of micros. There are great micros, there are just plain ol' micros, and there are lame micros.

 

Here's the breakdown, as I see it:

 

Lame micros are ones that are no suprise after you've found one or two, they are generally film cannisters or other containers that don't stay dry and take no imagination.

 

Just Plain Old Micros are simply micros because of their size. They have been hidden with some thought, and not simply tossed somewhere because there was no other cache there. But they generally are just a simple container.

 

Great micros have a "wow!" factor of one sort or another. It may be the camouflage, it may be the hidey-hole, or it may be the place it brought you to, but one way or another, it leaves you feeling good about having found it.

 

Well said.

 

I think a better question may be why do so many micros have to be in the first group?

[+StarBrand]

I have done a number of well thought out very nicely placed micros. I very much enjoyed hunting them. However, when I do come across a thoughtless sad container with a wet logsheet, haphazardly placed - it is highly likely to be a micro. Thats just a fact.

[TM92]

I like micro's just because you are so relieved when you find them. It makes me feel good.

[+mcrow]

Some of the best caches I have found have been micros. That said some of the worst caches I have found have been micros too. It seems like every time I hear somone talking about a small cache on this site they say "lame micro". A cache does not have to be big to be good or well thought out. To be honest when I spot an ammo can 90 feet away while walking down a trail. I would rather have a challenge. ok, I'm done venting now I'm going back to work.

 

They don't. As I just posted in another thread, in my experience, there are three kinds of micros. There are great micros, there are just plain ol' micros, and there are lame micros.

 

Here's the breakdown, as I see it:

 

Lame micros are ones that are no suprise after you've found one or two, they are generally film cannisters or other containers that don't stay dry and take no imagination.

 

Just Plain Old Micros are simply micros because of their size. They have been hidden with some thought, and not simply tossed somewhere because there was no other cache there. But they generally are just a simple container.

 

Great micros have a "wow!" factor of one sort or another. It may be the camouflage, it may be the hidey-hole, or it may be the place it brought you to, but one way or another, it leaves you feeling good about having found it.

 

Well said.

 

I think a better question may be why do so many micros have to be in the first group?

 

I think there are two reasons:

 

#1- there are a ton more places to put a micro that won't be muggled so it takes less effort to find a muggle resistant spot.

 

#2- Some people think quantity over quality. It's easy to place a bunch of meaningless micros compared to finding a cool and interesting spot for a single nice large cache.

[+Renegade Knight]

Why does a micro have to be lame?

 

They don't.

 

All other things being the same I would rather find a larger container in the same spot than a micro because I do enjoy looking at the swag and being able to leave it. So in my world a larger cache where it changes nothing about the "great hide" is icing on the cake. A micro only adds value where the choice is "hide a micro or hide nothing at all".

[Clan Riffster]

Micros don't have to be lame. It just works out that way most of the time, for me.

Liking or disliking micros is often all about personal, biased caching aesthetics.

Geographically, most of the micros around here are placed with little thought or effort. Utter voids of creativity.

In speaking with these hiders, many of them are unwilling to invest the time, effort or money in hiding anything else.

They believe they are contributing to the local caching world by spewing out dozens of crappy containers in uninspired locations.

For folks who like this kind of thing, these would not be lame.

For those who don't, lame is a fitting adjective.

[+Hrethgir]

I've found good micros, but I've also found plenty of stinkers. Now, on my PQ's, i filter out micros, especially around town. Lampost skirts in a Walmart parking lot, a key holder stuck to a bench next to a busy street, just boring and lame. I want to at least see something cool or neat if there isn't going to be any swag, but appearently that's just asking too much that a cache gets me a smiley AND is fun!

[Skippermark]

We've found that there are lame caches of all sizes. As the OP pointed out, spotting an ammo can 90 feet away, probably under the only fallen log in the area could be considered as lame as finding a keyholder on the only guardrail in a parking lot. Personally, I like all caches and would find neither lame, just depends what I'm in the mood for.

[+webscouter.]

We've found that there are lame caches of all sizes. As the OP pointed out, spotting an ammo can 90 feet away, probably under the only fallen log in the area could be considered as lame as finding a keyholder on the only guardrail in a parking lot. Personally, I like all caches and would find neither lame, just depends what I'm in the mood for.

 

But even this ammo can is probably hidden in a location that was interesting, fun or challenging to get to. If not it would be muggled fairly quickly.

 

The issue with micros is that way to many end up in parking lots of box stores. I enjoy a quick micro if it is in a location that is nice, even if there is NO challenge at all in finding it. For an example see http://coord.info/GCGMP6 I walked up to it without taking my GPS from the auto holder. But the view of Mt Shasta was amazing.

 

That being said the other day I hit a lamppost micro that I didn't even get out of my car for. Normally I would have passed it by but it was going to be the only cache in a county that I was going to be able to find in the time I had. Was it lame? Yes of course, but it did meet a need.

[+gof1]

Yes Virginia, there are lame caches in all sizes. Somehow the percentages are not the same. Most micro caches fall in the lame end of the pool. Not so with other sizes. While most of the larger than micro caches may not make it past average most micros are hard pressed to do that well.

 

Why is it that so many people seem to be afraid to admit that there exist caches that they don't enjoy?

[+tozainamboku]

Why does ice cream have to be vanilla?

 

Every cacher has their own likes and dislikes in caches. Some people just don't like micros. Others tend to object to the fact that in urban environments micros can be hidden in some places where they don't enjoy looking for a cache, or in rural environments a micro might just be too hard to find in a location with many potential hiding places. Others will enjoy the fact that there is an urban micro nearby for them to find even if the location is not the best or may enjoy the challenge of coming up with a way to systematically search many hiding spots to find that "evil" hide. Asking why people think micro are lame or that micros are more likely to be lame is like asking why a certain flavor of ice cream that they don't like is produced. It is simply a matter of personnel taste.

[Clan Riffster]

Most micro caches fall in the lame end of the pool. Not so with other sizes.

I suspect this is, at least partially, due to investments. I know if I spend $50 buying, camo'ing and stocking an ammo can, I'm not going to toss it under some Burger King shrubbery. I've invested both money and time creating it, which gives me a certain degree of accomplishment. That personal pride would be deflated if I didn't continue to incorporate effort in the actual hiding of the container and the writing of the cache page. Quality for me is an holistic measurement. If all I did to acquire a "cache" was stop by a Walgreens photo development counter, nabbing a film can and stuffing in my receipt as a log, I would not be so motivated to hike way the heck out in a swamp.

[+fizzymagic]

Most micro caches fall in the lame end of the pool.

I'm not sure I agree. I think the converse it undeniably true, though: most lame caches are micros or nanos.

[Skippermark]

But even this ammo can is probably hidden in a location that was interesting, fun or challenging to get to. If not it would be muggled fairly quickly.

Yes, most ammo boxes are at least a short walk in the woods and not out in public like a lot of micros. With micros, because of their small size, it's easy for people to stick them anywhere.

 

But, we did see a regular size cache under a lamp post in CA. The skirts in the area we were in were like a foot tall. It was so funny. When we saw "regular" in the description, we thought the owner forgot to change it.

 

And, we wanted to prove that you can hide a regular where most people would hide a micro, so we placed a largeish lock and lock, cammo'd it so it blended in well (but clearly wrote geocaching game piece on top of it) and then hid it in a very busy and urban area, about 2 feet from where people stood everyday. It lasted for about 18 months before it got chewed up by something. It was fun to see people's logs and their surprise at finding such a big container in a "micro only" spot.

[+Kohavis]

Most micro caches fall in the lame end of the pool.

Unfair, and maybe true where you live, but not true out here. Some of the cleverest, most imaginative caches I've found have been micros

 

I've also found several .30 cal. ammo cans that seemed like they were just tossed into the bush without much thought. I think it all depends on the hiders and not necessarily just the size

[+Frank Broughton]

Why is it that so many people seem to be afraid to admit that there exist caches that they don't enjoy?

 

I am not - see my post today on gitbuff GOF.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

I don't think Micros are lame, I just wish that more players were more creative in thinking of things to put in them. I'm not really into just signing the log, I like to see SOMEthing in the Cache that's interesting. I have a whole list of tiny items that I like to put into Micros.

[knowschad]

Why is it that so many people seem to be afraid to admit that there exist caches that they don't enjoy?

 

I don't think that is what most of us are doing, at all. I think we are simply resisting generalizations. There are plenty of caches of all sizes that I have not enjoyed.

 

I have done many caches that took me into beautiful woods, looking for an ammobox or similar sized cache, only to find it in the deadest, rottenest, dirtiest, trashiest section in the entire area. You find it, and can't help but wonder, why didn't he hide it over there, by those towering white pines?

 

There are great caches, good caches, and lame caches. There are large, regular, small, and micro caches. Period. I wish that everyone would stop with the vague generalizations based on size, 'cause it simply is not true.

[+Criminal]

Why does a micro have to be lame?

A micro only adds value where the choice is "hide a micro or hide nothing at all".

That's not the only choice. The cache I placed in downtown Seattle was large enough to hold six ammo cans inside it. It's usually more like, "hide a micro because I can't be bothered to put any thought or effort into my hide".

[Mr.Yuck]

Some of the best caches I have found have been micros. That said some of the worst caches I have found have been micros too. It seems like every time I hear somone talking about a small cache on this site they say "lame micro". A cache does not have to be big to be good or well thought out. To be honest when I spot an ammo can 90 feet away while walking down a trail. I would rather have a challenge. ok, I'm done venting now I'm going back to work.

 

Let me be the first to say that's umm, an interesting username.

 

There have been a few people that have made the (forgive me for saying) rather simplistic argument about ammo boxes under piles of sticks. But I've always been of the opinion that those of you who profess to like to be "challenged" are a very small minority of Geocachers. The people hitting 50 parking lots a day with their 5 word or less find logs don't appear to want to be "challenged". Neither do, on the totally opposite end of the scale, big-time old schoolers like myself who like regulars in the woods that are designed to be found. If I go looking for a cache, I'm almost always expecting to find it when I get there.

[knowschad]

Why does a micro have to be lame?

A micro only adds value where the choice is "hide a micro or hide nothing at all".

That's not the only choice. The cache I placed in downtown Seattle was large enough to hold six ammo cans inside it. It's usually more like, "hide a micro because I can't be bothered to put any thought or effort into my hide".

 

I'm glad that you were clever enough to do that, Criminal and I seriously wish that I could find it so that I could see how you did it. But please do not imply that because you have one good-sized urban cache that anyone that doesn't is lazy or stupid (can't be bothered to put any thought or effort ). I'm guessing that you had a very good idea for a very specific situation, and that's great, but I'm also betting that you probably only have one cache that fits that category, right?

[Clan Riffster]

It's usually more like, "hide a micro because I can't be bothered to put any thought or effort into my hide".

How true. It's not the cache that's lame, it's the creator. Prior to being introduced to this game, the lamest cache I've ever seen was quite likely doing an awesome job holding a roll of film. It's not till some creativity vacuum plops it into Burger King shrubbery that it becomes a lame cache. (in my rather biased opinion)

[+SD Marc]

Since we're already bitching about micros, I'm going to say that generally, I don't care for them, especially in the "micro-in-a-haystack" scenarios, where you could hide 500 micros, and even a couple of ammo cans would be a tough find. That said, one of the coolest hides I've come across in weeks was a micro, yesterday, in a beautiful spot, and a very creative hiding spot.

[+Criminal]

Why does a micro have to be lame?

A micro only adds value where the choice is "hide a micro or hide nothing at all".

That's not the only choice. The cache I placed in downtown Seattle was large enough to hold six ammo cans inside it. It's usually more like, "hide a micro because I can't be bothered to put any thought or effort into my hide".

 

I'm glad that you were clever enough to do that, Criminal and I seriously wish that I could find it so that I could see how you did it. But please do not imply that because you have one good-sized urban cache that anyone that doesn't is lazy or stupid (can't be bothered to put any thought or effort ). I'm guessing that you had a very good idea for a very specific situation, and that's great, but I'm also betting that you probably only have one cache that fits that category, right?

 

No, I've had several good full sized and urban hides, actually. But you did, without knowing it, hit on the exact problem. You see, if I didn't think I could hide a great cache, I wouldn't hide a cache at all. Now, just imagine if everyone had the same attitude, either a memorable hide or nothing. Yes, there’d probably be fewer caches to look for, but the game (such as it is) would be exponentially better than it is right now. That goes for all caches, not just micros.

Edited May 12, 2009 by Criminal

[knowschad]

No, I've had several good full sized and urban hides, actually. But you did, without knowing it, hit on the exact problem. You see, if I didn't think I could hide a great cache, I wouldn't hide a cache at all. Now, just imagine if everyone had the same attitude, either a memorable hide or nothing. Yes, there’d probably be fewer caches to look for, but the game (such as it is) would be exponentially better than it is right now. That goes for all caches, not just micros.

 

Well, good for you. And I do mean that. But bigger ain't neccessarily better. Because you managed to hide several clever large or regular sized caches right in plain view, please don't belittle those that hide clever micros in plain view. I once made a casting of a bronze "load limit" plaque on a footbridge. It took me weeks to complete it. I took a negative impression first, using a wooden frame filled with clay, made a plaster of paris positive from that, then a latex mold from that, and finally a polyester positive from that, embedding tiny supermagnets in the resin. I then painstakingly painted it to pass for weathered bronze, just like the other two on the same bridge.

 

It sat there in plain view of the passing public until about three years later, a bridge inspector found it and asked to have it removed. And I could continue. Micros can be every bit as creative and it gets my hackles up whenever I hear anyone (yes, even you, who I respect) give a blanket condemnation to micros as not having any imagination. That's pure bunk!

[knowschad]

 

No, I've had several good full sized and urban hides, actually. But you did, without knowing it, hit on the exact problem. You see, if I didn't think I could hide a great cache, I wouldn't hide a cache at all. Now, just imagine if everyone had the same attitude, either a memorable hide or nothing. Yes, there’d probably be fewer caches to look for, but the game (such as it is) would be exponentially better than it is right now. That goes for all caches, not just micros.

 

Curiously, why have all of your hides been archived, Criminal? Just decided to get out of the game of hiding and maintaining caches? If so, are you willing to share the secrets of your "hidden in plain view" caches? Either in public, or in private, I'd love to hear about them.

[+sbell111]

 

No, I've had several good full sized and urban hides, actually. But you did, without knowing it, hit on the exact problem. You see, if I didn't think I could hide a great cache, I wouldn't hide a cache at all. Now, just imagine if everyone had the same attitude, either a memorable hide or nothing. Yes, there’d probably be fewer caches to look for, but the game (such as it is) would be exponentially better than it is right now. That goes for all caches, not just micros.

 

Curiously, why have all of your hides been archived, Criminal? Just decided to get out of the game of hiding and maintaining caches? If so, are you willing to share the secrets of your "hidden in plain view" caches? Either in public, or in private, I'd love to hear about them.

This is not an unfair question.

 

The general belief is that micros are better for urban areas because they are less likely to be muggled or cause drama than larger caches are. As a hider of large caches in urban areas, I would be interested to know more about the life of these caches, rather than just the hiding of them.

 

Also, I find it ironic that I have found exactly one of Criminal's caches. It was an easy peasey micro cache magnetically attached to a lamppost. I enjoyed finding it.

[+Criminal]

Our resident genius answered it best,

I think the converse [is] undeniably true, though: most lame caches are micros or nanos.

 

While there certainly are some really great micros out there, and I would never deny that there are, when it comes to lame throw-downs, micros offer the path of least resistance.

 

Curiously, why have all of your hides been archived, Criminal?

 

The short answer is that I really lost interest in what the game has become; enough that I decided it was easier to just bag the whole thing than continue being aggravated. When the game first started, the adventure of finding the cache (and sometimes just finding the parking) was as important as the actual find itself. Thus, even if you claimed a “did not find” you felt little loss, you still had the fun and adventure of being there, and could always go back for another try.

 

When the losers discovered geocaching, they placed emphasis on their find numbers over everything else, so much so that they will lie and claim a find on where they decided the cache must have been. From this came throw-down replacement micros, a way to claim a find and feel less guilt over having dishonest numbers. People also felt their ‘hide’ numbers needed pumping so they started dropping lame caches, most of which are micros- the topic of this thread. BTW-I see the same thing in Twitter, some people want to have huge numbers of followers, as if that were in some way important to the purpose of twitter (which was a way of finding out what your friends are doing or saying). Seattle turns a blind eye to it because as long as people are paying, there no need to rock the boat. Trust me, it wasn’t easy to abandon a Charter Membership, but I’m not going to pay for something I rarely ever do. I have plenty of other hobbies to occupy my time. I prefer the low drama life; it keeps my hairline up at the front of my skull where it belongs.

 

Also, I find it ironic that I have found exactly one of Criminal's caches. It was an easy peasey micro cache magnetically attached to a lamppost. I enjoyed finding it.

 

In 2003 the game was very different than it is now. Back then that cache was unique, there wasn’t another like it anywhere nearby that I was aware of. It also wasn’t hidden under the skirt, it was right on the side of the pole in plain sight. I could actually check on it while driving south on I5- a glance over and I could see it on the pole while driving at 65 MPH, yet non-players never noticed it (until they repainted the pole). Even you have to admit the game is much different than when we started, no?

Edited May 12, 2009 by Criminal

[+sbell111]

Our resident genius answered it best,

I think the converse [is] undeniably true, though: most lame caches are micros or nanos.

While there certainly are some really great micros out there, and I would never deny that there are, when it comes to lame throw-downs, micros offer the path of least resistance.

Curiously, why have all of your hides been archived, Criminal?

The short answer is that I really lost interest in what the game has become; enough that I decided it was easier to just bag the whole thing than continue being aggravated. When the game first started, the adventure of finding the cache (and sometimes just finding the parking) was as important as the actual find itself. Thus, even if you claimed a “did not find” you felt little loss, you still had the fun and adventure of being there, and could always go back for another try.

 

When the losers discovered geocaching, they placed emphasis on their find numbers over everything else, so much so that they will lie and claim a find on where they decided the cache must have been. From this came throw-down replacement micros, a way to claim a find and feel less guilt over having dishonest numbers. People also felt their ‘hide’ numbers needed pumping so they started dropping lame caches, most of which are micros- the topic of this thread. BTW-I see the same thing in Twitter, some people want to have huge numbers of followers, as if that were in some way important to the purpose of twitter (which was a way of finding out what your friends are doing or saying). Seattle turns a blind eye to it because as long as people are paying, there no need to rock the boat. Trust me, it wasn’t easy to abandon a Charter Membership, but I’m not going to pay for something I rarely ever do. I have plenty of other hobbies to occupy my time. I prefer the low drama life; it keeps my hairline up at the front of my skull where it belongs.

Also, I find it ironic that I have found exactly one of Criminal's caches. It was an easy peasey micro cache magnetically attached to a lamppost. I enjoyed finding it.

In 2003 the game was very different than it is now. Back then that cache was unique, there wasn’t another like it anywhere nearby that I was aware of. It also wasn’t hidden under the skirt, it was right on the side of the pole in plain sight. I could actually check on it while driving south on I5- a glance over and I could see it on the pole while driving at 65 MPH, yet non-players never noticed it (until they repainted the pole). Even you have to admit the game is much different than when we started, no?

I agree that some players are different than they were, in ways that you listed and others. However, I don't think that my game has changed at all.

 

I respect that you stepped back when the game got to be less fun that your other activities. I've done the same several times over the years, to a lesser extent.

[+sbell111]

Our resident genius answered it best,

I think the converse [is] undeniably true, though: most lame caches are micros or nanos.

While there certainly are some really great micros out there, and I would never deny that there are, when it comes to lame throw-downs, micros offer the path of least resistance.

Curiously, why have all of your hides been archived, Criminal?

The short answer is that I really lost interest in what the game has become; enough that I decided it was easier to just bag the whole thing than continue being aggravated. When the game first started, the adventure of finding the cache (and sometimes just finding the parking) was as important as the actual find itself. Thus, even if you claimed a “did not find” you felt little loss, you still had the fun and adventure of being there, and could always go back for another try.

 

When the losers discovered geocaching, they placed emphasis on their find numbers over everything else, so much so that they will lie and claim a find on where they decided the cache must have been. From this came throw-down replacement micros, a way to claim a find and feel less guilt over having dishonest numbers. People also felt their ‘hide’ numbers needed pumping so they started dropping lame caches, most of which are micros- the topic of this thread. BTW-I see the same thing in Twitter, some people want to have huge numbers of followers, as if that were in some way important to the purpose of twitter (which was a way of finding out what your friends are doing or saying). Seattle turns a blind eye to it because as long as people are paying, there no need to rock the boat. Trust me, it wasn’t easy to abandon a Charter Membership, but I’m not going to pay for something I rarely ever do. I have plenty of other hobbies to occupy my time. I prefer the low drama life; it keeps my hairline up at the front of my skull where it belongs.

Also, I find it ironic that I have found exactly one of Criminal's caches. It was an easy peasey micro cache magnetically attached to a lamppost. I enjoyed finding it.

In 2003 the game was very different than it is now. Back then that cache was unique, there wasn’t another like it anywhere nearby that I was aware of. It also wasn’t hidden under the skirt, it was right on the side of the pole in plain sight. I could actually check on it while driving south on I5- a glance over and I could see it on the pole while driving at 65 MPH, yet non-players never noticed it (until they repainted the pole). Even you have to admit the game is much different than when we started, no?

I agree that some players are different than they were, in ways that you listed and others. However, I don't think that my game has changed at all.

 

I respect that you stepped back when the game got to be less fun that your other activities. I've done the same several times over the years, to a lesser extent.

I've had a day to think about my reply to Criminal and I realized that it was not exactly accurate. My game has changed. Due to changes in my physical abilities since I began caching and time pressures, I have come to enjoy micro caches much more than I did in the early years. Perhaps, this has allowed me to better adjust to the changing hiding habits over the years.

[+power69]

Some of the best caches I have found have been micros. That said some of the worst caches I have found have been micros too. It seems like every time I hear somone talking about a small cache on this site they say "lame micro". A cache does not have to be big to be good or well thought out. To be honest when I spot an ammo can 90 feet away while walking down a trail. I would rather have a challenge. ok, I'm done venting now I'm going back to work.

a nano in a 60ft by 60ft pebble patch disgused as a pebble or any other micro that the only possible way to find them is to do it by accident.

And the clue is "near a small rock"

[+wimseyguy]

This one wasn't lame. Just a routine container hanging in an evergreen, but at the site of a grist mill dam dating back to 1812.

 

[+Lean Wolf]

Oh, this is still a topic. May I sum it up?

 

 

[AZcachemeister]

They don't HAVE to be, but the ease of hiding them and the low investment involved means that many are.

 

Not all lame caches are micros, and not all micro-caches are lame.

[+Clothahump]

I have my PQs and my GSAK filters set to eliminate micros. I've gotten really tired of hunting under light posts.

[+Curioddity]

I've also found several .30 cal. ammo cans that seemed like they were just tossed into the bush without much thought. I think it all depends on the hiders and not necessarily just the size

I'd beware blaming the original hider by default. Could be that a lazy cache hunter didn't put it back where they found it.

 

One of the very first caches I found is a micro that is hidden in plain sight. If it's carefully placed it looks like part of the structure it's hidden on and would take a real sharp eye or some touchy-feely investigation to find. But even as an inexperienced newb, I found it immediately because it wasn't in the right place which made it stick out like a hammered thumb. Truth be known, if it had been in it's proper location, I probably wouldn't have found it and wouldn't be aware of this clever kind of cache yet.

 

It was quite apparent to me where this cache belonged and that's where I returned it to after I signed the log. Too bad the last person who found it wasn't as courteous. They turned a very clever micro hide into a very lame one and it would be an injustice to criticize the original cacher.

 

Pete

Edited May 16, 2009 by Curioddity

[+DibsNot]

As a relative geonewbie I have found the discussion on this topic to be very interesting. Just thought I'd toss in my two cents. First - I love being part of the geocommunity and the fact that this game can be joined by anyone with the time and inclination is a plus. Second - from reading logs and looking at find numbers my guess is that a lot of people jump into the shallow end of the geopool and fairly quickly (under 50 finds) quickly get back out. That being said, I think folks stay in (or jump in and out, as life and likes dictate) the game for many many different reasons. One of the things I like best about geocaching is that I can spend as much or little time and energy as I want on it.

 

I've found micros such as the one cleverly hidden on a sculpture in a very busy area that took me four tries to find. I was very impressed by the way it was cammouflaged. Much thought went into that one. I've found huge ammo cans hidden in the ubiquitous tree stump that were only interesting because the CO put it in a place that was fun to visit. I've found lamp post micros that served the purpose of feeding my geoaddiction and the need to at least find something on the way to work. And I've found multi's that even in a nice area with interesting waypoints still felt a little like a downer because it felt like the CO was just trying to up their hide numbers.

 

And as I give much thought to what my first hide will be I, personally, want it to be interesting and a little tough to find so as to give the finder a sense of accomplishment. But that's just my attitude about hiding.

 

So I think the whole thing comes down to, just like life (omg - did she really get that deep?)....geocaching has the good, the bad, and the truly lame....and you get out of it what you put into it.