Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
darepabe

What makes a 'good' urban cache?

Recommended Posts

In an urban, populated area - what makes a good cache site?

 

One where the container is built to last. Aside from that, urban hides all have their good and bad points.

Share this post


Link to post

The same thing that makes any cache good... or bad. It's largely a matter of personal preference. The caches that appeal the most to me (in any environment, including urban), are those that offer the greatest adventure. Some intemperate thoughts on the matter from the Riffster Clan:

 

Location

The motto for Groundspeak is "The Language of Location". This, more than anything, should be your first clue in determining if your cache is a stinker. Ask yourself, "Why am I bringing people to this spot?" If the only answer you can come up with is yet another mindless smiley, perhaps it's time to rethink ground zero. A waterfall is good. 500 acres of sweltering, exhaust laden blacktop filled with soccer moms in SUV's is bad.

 

Container Selection

The purpose of a cache container is to protect its contents. Whether those contents are a slip of paper covered with the initials of a bunch of geo-nerds, or the contents are high dollar, really kewl swag, is really immaterial. If the container won't protect what's inside, it is lame. Quality containers include ammo cans, Lock & Locks, decon kits, soda bottle preforms, waterproof match containers and bison tubes. Inadequate containers include Gladware, black & gray film canisters, hide-a-keys, Altoid tins and duct tape covered baggies. These may work great indoors, but they simply will not repel moisture once subjected to the whims of Mother Nature.

 

Hide Style

If a hide style gets copied too often, it automatically becomes lame. Hide-a-keys on guard rails and film canisters under lamp posts require absolutely no imagination to hide or to find, and therefor earn pretty high Lameness Quotient points. Any hide style that encourages vandalism or otherwise violate Groundspeak's guidelines, (graffiti coords/affixing electrical boxes to structures/buried caches/etc), are bad for the game, and should be avoided like the plague. Some of the best hides utilize subtle misdirection, getting folks to look everywhere but where their GPSr's tell them to look. I consider that a good thing, as it forces me to fire up the ol' grey matter.

 

Write Up

Your cache page write up is the medium used to present your cache to the community. You should be proud of your cache, and let your cache page reflect that fact. If there are more words tattooed on Rosie O'Donnell's backside than in your write up, folks might get the impression that you don't care about your hide. A bit of history about your site, or some humorous anecdotes about yourself, seem to go over well with the caching community. On a similar note, spellcheck is your friend.

 

Hints

Your hint should actually help your fellow cacher find your cache. You can be blunt or creative, so long as the message is relevant. A sure fire way to create angst amongst your fellow cachers is to get them to struggle through 10 minutes of ROT-13, just to discern a hint like, "This one is too easy for a hint".

 

Results

If you see a high percentage of single sentence find logs on your cache page, that is a fairly reasonable indicator that your cache may be suffering from a lack of ingenuity. This trend becomes more pronounced if you see a lot of "TNLNSL" entries. At that point, your cache has reached a lameness critical mass, and should probably be put out of its misery.

 

(Disclaimer for the anti-puritans: These opinions are mine, and mine alone, and should not be seen as either expressly or implicitly attempting to dictate how others play this game. If hiding lame caches is your thing, by all means, don't let this ole fat crippled guy stop you)

Share this post


Link to post

First of all... Lame caches are really important to the game. After three or four DNF's in a row that takes up a good part of your day, it's nice to find a lame cache. That way you know that not all of the caches have been eaten by zombies. :blink:

 

Next, black & gray film canisters and hide-a-keys can work if you put a little thought in to it (i.e. Camo). For a few good ideas go here

 

For me, the number one thing that I do to make my caches better, is to use "Rite in the Rain" paper for my log book and stash note. It cost more, but if it gets wet you can still write on it.

 

If you can find places that no one in the area has thought of or at least do it in a different way that is always a plus.

Edited by Tobias & Petronella

Share this post


Link to post
In an urban, populated area - what makes a good cache site

 

The same thing that makes a good cache site in a non-urban area; ie, a location worth visiting whether the cache is there or not.

 

And then just about everything else that Clan Riffster has said. Though I'll disagree with him about using a well-used hide style. Some hide styles (guard rail hide-a-keys for instance) work well. They tend to hold up over time, and no damage is done. If the location is a nice one, a guard rail hide a key is okay.

Share this post


Link to post
After three or four DNF's in a row that takes up a good part of your day, it's nice to find a lame cache.

I reckon we don't all have the same definition of "nice".

For me, when a cache is so utterly devoid of creativity that it earns a high LQ rating, it sucks regardless of how many DNFs I had.

A crappy cache is still crappy.

But, as I explained earlier, I am rather biased. :blink:

 

Next, black & gray film canisters and hide-a-keys can work if you put a little thought in to it (i.e. Camo).

The problem with black & grey film cans and hide a keys are not solved simply by gluing them to a rock or a pine cone. These containers are not even remotely water resistant. They are possibly suitable in an environment with less than 0.01% humidity, but even that's a stretch. Fortunately, there are lots of quality containers available that are of a similar size. If you are OK with the seekers of your hides experiencing the joys of moldy logs, and/or dripping Rite in the Rain paper, by all means, keep using crappy containers. If you have pride in your hides, use quality containers. It's not that hard a concept to grasp. :D

 

(Disclaimer for the anti-puritans: These opinions are mine, and mine alone, and should not be seen as either expressly or implicitly attempting to dictate how others play this game. If hiding lame caches is your thing, by all means, don't let this ole fat crippled guy stop you)

Share this post


Link to post

In an urban, populated area - what makes a good cache site?

 

Someone isn't posting the full story...

 

The OP is specifically talking about GC1XBC3.

 

On Sunday I posted a DNF on the above cache, I arrived with my son to find the cache had placed in a recycling area right next to a bottle bank furthermore it was also uncomfortably close to public toilets. At the time of our visit the ground was covered in broken glass (as you would expect next to a bottle bank) although the cache owner assures me this is not normally the case.

 

For obvious reasons I quickly abandoned the search and suggested the hider could have found a better hiding place. Since then the owner has responded by posting a note (which he has now removed / edited to point here) and has also deleted my DNF plus a further response.

Share this post


Link to post

To me its a cache that brings me to a nice park, even a small patch of green, an historic site or an otherwise unique or interesting location.

 

In NYC there is one at a large chunk of the Berlin Wall (complete with the original graffiti in German) that sits in a pocket park between two skyscrapers. That to me is the kind of thing that makes a good urban cache.

 

There is another in NYC hidden at the street corner where an opening scene of the Odd Couple was filmed. It's the scene where Oscar almost gets hit by a car an pounds on the hood. There is a nano on a fire hydrant right on the corner. I thought that was pretty cool.

 

I have one in the main drag of a town that uses old photos of the street dating from 1900 - the 1930's for clues

to the final location. People who find that one seem to really enjoy it.

Share this post


Link to post

The OP is specifically talking about GC1XBC3.

 

To the OP...why did you use a ? (unknown) for cache size? You mention in the clues that it's a nano - why not choose micro size? One thing that makes an urban cache (or any cache) more enjoyable is when the size is clearly spelled out unless knowing the size would somehow be a spoiler.

Edited by Lone R

Share this post


Link to post

The OP is specifically talking about GC1XBC3.

 

To the OP...why did you use a ? (unknown) for cache size? You mention in the clues that it's a nano - why not choose micro size? One thing that makes an urban cache (or any cache) more enjoyable is when the size is clearly spelled out unless knowing the size would somehow be a spoiler.

I agree. In fact, the only problem that I have for that cache is the unknown size. Personally, I think that TPTB should do away with that choice.

Share this post


Link to post

Actually, based on the text on the cache page, it would appear that, while the actual cache may be in an upleasant area, the unpleasant area is in a rather interesting area, with plenty of historic buildings to view nearby.

 

 

The cache page clearly makes mention of the recycling facility. I'm surprised that you even got out of the car, if it was that unpleasant.

Share this post


Link to post

Like others have said -- location and creativity are important. Although I will enjoy a non-creative cache in a great location more than a creative cache in a location where there is no reason to be apart from the game. Either way, these are very subjective factors. But in any urban setting, the amount of people who may be present, the strength of gps reception, and the corresponding cache description are all important.

 

That said, in my mind, it is hard to find an urban cache better than Hang on, Snoopy! It shows that you do not need to do anything amazing with the container (in this case, a smple ammo can) if the spot is just right.

Edited by Erickson

Share this post


Link to post

The cache page clearly makes mention of the recycling facility. I'm surprised that you even got out of the car, if it was that unpleasant.

 

That's only been added today, when I mentioned the recycling area in my log I had my wrists slapped for posting a spoiler.

 

It is a VERY nice village and there lots of places for caches, even drive bys but this cache shows the area's worst side.

 

Before attempting this cache I noted:

  1. It has a 1 star terrain (suitable the those who are disabled)
  2. It has a wheelchair attribute
  3. It has a buggy friendly attribute

As I knew I'd be walking past with my son (who uses a buggy due to his disability) plus I knew the village is a nice location I could see no reason to doubt the placement.

 

Maybe the fact that the hider lives opposite the cache points towards the real reason why it was placed there.

Share this post


Link to post

If you don't like the cache container or cache location...ignore the listing...filter out the caches you don't like and go caching....Stay safe

Share this post


Link to post

The OP is specifically talking about GC1XBC3.

 

To the OP...why did you use a ? (unknown) for cache size? You mention in the clues that it's a nano - why not choose micro size? One thing that makes an urban cache (or any cache) more enjoyable is when the size is clearly spelled out unless knowing the size would somehow be a spoiler.

 

It should be listed as a micro. Sounds like in general like an interesting spot, but perhas the actual hiding

place could have been chosen a bit better.

 

I also don't understand the point of deleting the DNF. There was nothing wrong with the original DNF, as it was the honest opinion of the searcher. It might have helped others determine if this is the kind of place they would want to bring their child. DNFs are a part of the cache history and shouldn't be deleted in all but the most extreme circumstances (e.g. profanity). Sanitizing your cache logs benefits nobody.

Share this post


Link to post

My opinion? A "good" urban cache is a good cache that happens to be in an urban area.

 

Now, define a "good" cache.

 

Oh, and I saw above what appears to me that some folks are equating "lame" with "easy." I disagree. There are plenty of hard lame cache and good easy caches. Lame caches have a low inherent fun quotient.

Share this post


Link to post

In an urban, populated area - what makes a good cache site?

 

Someone isn't posting the full story...

 

The OP is specifically talking about GC1XBC3.

 

On Sunday I posted a DNF on the above cache, I arrived with my son to find the cache had placed in a recycling area right next to a bottle bank furthermore it was also uncomfortably close to public toilets. At the time of our visit the ground was covered in broken glass (as you would expect next to a bottle bank) although the cache owner assures me this is not normally the case.

 

For obvious reasons I quickly abandoned the search and suggested the hider could have found a better hiding place. Since then the owner has responded by posting a note (which he has now removed / edited to point here) and has also deleted my DNF plus a further response.

 

Boy oh boy. Very enlightening.

Share this post


Link to post

The cache page clearly makes mention of the recycling facility. I'm surprised that you even got out of the car, if it was that unpleasant.

 

That's only been added today, when I mentioned the recycling area in my log I had my wrists slapped for posting a spoiler.

 

It is a VERY nice village and there lots of places for caches, even drive bys but this cache shows the area's worst side.

 

Before attempting this cache I noted:

  1. It has a 1 star terrain (suitable the those who are disabled)
  2. It has a wheelchair attribute
  3. It has a buggy friendly attribute

As I knew I'd be walking past with my son (who uses a buggy due to his disability) plus I knew the village is a nice location I could see no reason to doubt the placement.

 

Maybe the fact that the hider lives opposite the cache points towards the real reason why it was placed there.

 

Oops, meant to add my "Boy oh boy. Very enlightening." comment to the end of this post. (Not that the original post wasn't also enlightening.)

Edited by Lone R

Share this post


Link to post

The same thing that makes any cache good... or bad. It's largely a matter of personal preference. The caches that appeal the most to me (in any environment, including urban), are those that offer the greatest adventure. Some intemperate thoughts on the matter from the Riffster Clan:

 

Location

The motto for Groundspeak is "The Language of Location". This, more than anything, should be your first clue in determining if your cache is a stinker. Ask yourself, "Why am I bringing people to this spot?" If the only answer you can come up with is yet another mindless smiley, perhaps it's time to rethink ground zero. A waterfall is good. 500 acres of sweltering, exhaust laden blacktop filled with soccer moms in SUV's is bad.

 

Container Selection

The purpose of a cache container is to protect its contents. Whether those contents are a slip of paper covered with the initials of a bunch of geo-nerds, or the contents are high dollar, really kewl swag, is really immaterial. If the container won't protect what's inside, it is lame. Quality containers include ammo cans, Lock & Locks, decon kits, soda bottle preforms, waterproof match containers and bison tubes. Inadequate containers include Gladware, black & gray film canisters, hide-a-keys, Altoid tins and duct tape covered baggies. These may work great indoors, but they simply will not repel moisture once subjected to the whims of Mother Nature.

 

Hide Style

If a hide style gets copied too often, it automatically becomes lame. Hide-a-keys on guard rails and film canisters under lamp posts require absolutely no imagination to hide or to find, and therefor earn pretty high Lameness Quotient points. Any hide style that encourages vandalism or otherwise violate Groundspeak's guidelines, (graffiti coords/affixing electrical boxes to structures/buried caches/etc), are bad for the game, and should be avoided like the plague. Some of the best hides utilize subtle misdirection, getting folks to look everywhere but where their GPSr's tell them to look. I consider that a good thing, as it forces me to fire up the ol' grey matter.

 

Write Up

Your cache page write up is the medium used to present your cache to the community. You should be proud of your cache, and let your cache page reflect that fact. If there are more words tattooed on Rosie O'Donnell's backside than in your write up, folks might get the impression that you don't care about your hide. A bit of history about your site, or some humorous anecdotes about yourself, seem to go over well with the caching community. On a similar note, spellcheck is your friend.

 

Hints

Your hint should actually help your fellow cacher find your cache. You can be blunt or creative, so long as the message is relevant. A sure fire way to create angst amongst your fellow cachers is to get them to struggle through 10 minutes of ROT-13, just to discern a hint like, "This one is too easy for a hint".

 

Results

If you see a high percentage of single sentence find logs on your cache page, that is a fairly reasonable indicator that your cache may be suffering from a lack of ingenuity. This trend becomes more pronounced if you see a lot of "TNLNSL" entries. At that point, your cache has reached a lameness critical mass, and should probably be put out of its misery.

 

(Disclaimer for the anti-puritans: These opinions are mine, and mine alone, and should not be seen as either expressly or implicitly attempting to dictate how others play this game. If hiding lame caches is your thing, by all means, don't let this ole fat crippled guy stop you)

 

I think the above is on-target...IMNSHO.

 

I do go after the 'lame' ones though.

Share this post


Link to post

In an urban, populated area - what makes a good cache site?

 

A clever hide.

 

Or a cache that takes me to the urban path less traveled. That include homeless camps, hidden islands of nature, and urban slag (industrial zones that are old, abandoned, and falling apart)

 

Others don't like clever hides or urban slag, nature, or any path less traveled.

 

Clan Rifster put out a pretty good comment.

Share this post


Link to post

...Maybe the fact that the hider lives opposite the cache points towards the real reason why it was placed there.

That's certainly not a problem.

Share this post


Link to post

I have noticed that, in general, the more smileys a person has, the more they start to demand better caches. One would think that more smilies make people more happy but it seems to make them more grumpy.

 

My first find was a tupperware. My second was akin to a key holder or film canister. I was excited by all of my first finds.

I don't get as excited as the originals but continue to enjoy finding a film canister or a key holder and even still enjoy finding Tupperware. Not horribly keen on nanos but thats a different topic.

 

While I enjoy a cache in an urban park, I also enjoy a cache in a parking lot. Since not all caches are parking lots or parks, I enjoy the variety. Urban caches are urban caches. They come in all shapes and, though mostly micros, all sizes.

 

I am in it for the hunt and while I enjoy a creative hide or container, I don't begrudge the less creative.

 

It appears some people just can't find a way to be happy, or are determined to find a way to be miserable.

Share this post


Link to post

I was brought to this thread via the cache described by the Web Rat. Before I give my verdict on urban caches, I have a tangential question after reading the previous posts. Please ignore it, if you wish to stay on topic.... :blink:

 

(Why should a nano be listed as a micro when it is not (a micro)? I've visited many nano caches, and not one has been listed as micro that I've noticed. The convention in these parts definitely seems to be to listing a nano as an "other" sized cache - which makes perfect sense to me. So long as the cache is described as a nano in the cache listing, then surely there is nothing wrong with describing it as "other"?)

 

Now, back to urban caches. As stated on all my urban caches (or Urby(n) Caches, as the case may be!), I'm no great fan of urban caches. They're generally in unattractive places, and often in such places for no apparent reason but because they could be. I felt it was inevitable that urban caches would come to Bury St Edmunds, so in a pre-emptive strike each of my caches were chosen specially for their historic significance. Like other urban caches, the locations might not always be the most picturesque, but if these Urby(n) caches get people to know more about Bury, their purpose will have been fulfilled. They'll never compare with a good rural cache, but I hope cachers visiting them will take the caches for what they are, and be willing to learn a bit about the small market town of Bury St Edmunds.

 

The most popular of my urban/Urby(n) caches is Inner Glow, which gets me all sorts of emails thanking me for placing it (as well as the praise in the online logs). It seems people love the fact that the cache container is in plain view for those who look, and in one of the busiest areas of Bury St Edmunds. It's also quite a large container, making it rather difficult to remove and/or replace without attracting the attention of the many muggles.

 

Therefore, a large container (itself a novelty in urban caches) set in an obvious manner at a point of historical interest in a busy area seems to be a good formula for a good urban cache.

 

I say that somewhat tongue in cheek - since it is my own cache - but I do know that I enjoy finding a larger container, so make the assumption that other cachers will also. A nano or a micro is easy enough to hide in an urban setting, but more thought needs to be made to place a larger container!

 

For that reason, this Urby(n) cache always gets some surprised and happy comments, because it is so large. Definitely not what people are expecting to find (in part because I have called it a regular - though the truth is there for anyone who reads the logs....)

 

When attending an event in Coventry, we had a multitude of urban caches to choose from. Some were rather rubbish, but the good ones were very good! A nice idea was hiding caches on different levels of buildings (eg car parks), so that a cacher would be in the correct co-ords but unable to find the cache unless they found a way of getting to the correct level - sometimes more difficult than one might expect!

 

To be fair, so long as a good enough reason is given to me in the cache page as to why the location has been chosen, I will probably accept it. If it's a rubbish location and I have no idea why I've been brought there, I will likely give a scathing log. If it's the same rubbish location but I have been told that (in the case of the cache in question):

1) It's a convenient place to park to see a beautiful, historic village, and to make a quick cache and dash;

2) The car park itself might not be so nice, but the surrounding area is;

3) In addition, the cache can be seen from the owner's house, enabling her to have a laugh at the antics of cachers trying to make a quick cache and dash.

So long as I know why I'm there, I don't mind. It still might not be the greatest cache in the world (and I still might not be at all enamoured with the location), but at least I know why I am there, so I am less inclined to think it is a completely crappy cache.

Share this post


Link to post

Location, Location, Location, and presentation. If the thing you are highlighting with a cache is self-evident it might be fine to just hint that the seeker is in for a treat when they arrive at GZ, but often a good write up about the historical significance of a plot of land or other feature makes for a great cache. If a cache can teach me a little history, science, architecture, whatever I'm going to love it.

 

A clever hide can also set an urban cache apart, but for me those can get frustrating as you never quite know if the cache is difficult due to a clever CO, or poor coordinates, or a needle in a haystack style hide, etc until you make the find. (Though you can often make an educated guess from reading past logs.)

Share this post


Link to post

If a cache can teach me a little history, science, architecture, whatever I'm going to love it.

That is certainly what I attempt to do with my urban caches. But while cachers like you or me appreciate that, there are still plenty out there who don't care (and if it is a traditional cache, have not even bothered to read the cache page or previous logs), and so will still rubbish the cache. Often it does seem to be the more experienced cachers who have the greatest criticism (as a previous poster has mentioned in this thread).

 

A clever hide can also set an urban cache apart, but for me those can get frustrating as you never quite know if the cache is difficult due to a clever CO, or poor coordinates, or a needle in a haystack style hide, etc until you make the find. (Though you can often make an educated guess from reading past logs.)

Again, while I always like to read past logs before visiting an urban cache, I am fully aware that many people do not - purely because most urban caches are traditionals, and many cachers figure that a traditional should be able to be found by co-ordinates alone so never bother to read the cache page. On the other hand, it seems clear to me that if it is not a traditional, then even an urban cache doesn't get that many visitors. All my traditional urban caches are visited quite frequently, but those which are multi or mystery are barely ever visited...

Share this post


Link to post
(Why should a nano be listed as a micro when it is not (a micro)?
Because the guidelines defines 'micro' thusly:
Micro (35 mm film canister or smaller – less than approximately 3 ounces or .1 L – typically containing only a logbook or a logsheet)
Nanos are smaller than a film can. Therefore, they are micros.
I've visited many nano caches, and not one has been listed as micro that I've noticed. The convention in these parts definitely seems to be to listing a nano as an "other" sized cache - which makes perfect sense to me.
I don't know what to tell you. Apparently people in your area list their caches using the wrong size. I guess that one person started doing it this way and others followed suit. Still, it's wrong. Since the category for nanos exists, it cannot be 'other'.
So long as the cache is described as a nano in the cache listing, then surely there is nothing wrong with describing it as "other"?)[/i]
It is rather like asking someone if they are male or female and they respond with 'other'. If they are genetically male or genetically female, they cannot be 'other'.

 

or

 

Imagine filling out a form that asks for citizenship and offers the following choices - UK, France, Spain, Other. A person who lives in Paris and holds French passport is French, right? He is not 'other'.

 

Also, it gives impercise information to other cachers. Those people who don't like micros can easily filter them out using pocket queries. By listing yours as 'other', however, you force them to either receive your micros in their PQs or also filter our 'others' which might include caches that they enjoy (virtuals, earthcaches).

Share this post


Link to post

 

Location

Ask yourself, "Why am I bringing people to this spot?"

 

Container Selection

The purpose of a cache container is to protect its contents.

 

Hide Style

If a hide style gets copied too often, it automatically becomes lame.

 

Write Up

Your cache page write up is the medium used to present your cache to the community.

 

Hints

A sure fire way to create angst amongst your fellow cachers is to get them to struggle through 10 minutes of ROT-13, just to discern a hint like, "This one is too easy for a hint".

 

Results

If you see a high percentage of single sentence find logs on your cache page, that is a fairly reasonable indicator that your cache may be suffering from a lack of ingenuity.

 

^^^^^^^^What he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Again, while I always like to read past logs before visiting an urban cache, I am fully aware that many people do not - purely because most urban caches are traditionals, and many cachers figure that a traditional should be able to be found by co-ordinates alone so never bother to read the cache page.
That is as good a definition of 'traditional cache' as you will ever find.
On the other hand, it seems clear to me that if it is not a traditional, then even an urban cache doesn't get that many visitors. All my traditional urban caches are visited quite frequently, but those which are multi or mystery are barely ever visited...
Just list it as what it is. People who want to find that kind of cache will come do so. There is no need to 'trick' people into coming to look for it (such as by listing the size as 'other' when, in fact, it is a micro.

Share this post


Link to post

Just list it as what it is. People who want to find that kind of cache will come do so. There is no need to 'trick' people into coming to look for it (such as by listing the size as 'other' when, in fact, it is a micro.

Not sure why you've made that reply under a quote of mine, since not one of my urban caches trick people into looking for anything (and certainly don't list any micro as other). If you are heading back to the nano/micro argument then that is flogging a dead horse, and serves no purpose but a tangenital one (to use a word only very recently introduced to me - thanks Paul!)

 

As for my definition of a traditional cache, it might be the case (and I know it is), but you need only read the majority of posts in this thread to see that most people would like to see a decent effort made in any cache description, to justify and explain the placement of the cache (especially useful for an urban cache, whereby the reason may not be so obvious as most rural caches). Therefore your reply to my post seems a little pointless here?

Share this post


Link to post

Just list it as what it is. People who want to find that kind of cache will come do so. There is no need to 'trick' people into coming to look for it (such as by listing the size as 'other' when, in fact, it is a micro.

Not sure why you've made that reply under a quote of mine, since not one of my urban caches trick people into looking for anything (and certainly don't list any micro as other). If you are heading back to the nano/micro argument then that is flogging a dead horse, and serves no purpose but a tangenital one (to use a word only very recently introduced to me - thanks Paul!)

 

As for my definition of a traditional cache, it might be the case (and I know it is), but you need only read the majority of posts in this thread to see that most people would like to see a decent effort made in any cache description, to justify and explain the placement of the cache (especially useful for an urban cache, whereby the reason may not be so obvious as most rural caches). Therefore your reply to my post seems a little pointless here?

Then I suppose that it was as pointless as the post I was responding to. Edited by sbell111

Share this post


Link to post

It's got to take me to something worth seeing.

A park I've never been to.

A historical site.

A historical marker.

A pretty view.

A nice place to have lunch, or take a date to.

A great view.

 

What I hate in urban caches:

Trash sites: if you want to cito an area, get a official cito going. Dont' take me to a dump site without my consent.

 

Places with human waste. I'm not talking garbage here.

If the place is frequented by homeless, I should not be there by myself. Not safe.

If the place has human feces, it is very unsafe and I don't want to be there. I've got medical conditions that make it extra unsafe in my case. A little of that on my shoe tracked in my car, could put me in a hospital.

 

Broken glass. Let's just not go there. Let's keep it clean and safe and fun.

Garbage and broken glass is not fun.

If you are trying to point out a recycling site to make people recycle more, then make that clear in the write up. And put the cache maybe at a park next to the recycling center to keep me out of the glass. Thanks.

 

I'm in this for a good time. Create a cache that I will enjoy and we will all be happy.

Remember this is for FUN. Is your cache fun?

Share this post


Link to post

What I hate in urban caches:

 

Trash sites: if you want to cito an area, get a official cito going. Dont' take me to a dump site without my consent.

 

Places with human waste. I'm not talking garbage here.

 

Broken glass. Let's just not go there. Let's keep it clean and safe and fun.

Garbage and broken glass is not fun.

 

If you are trying to point out a recycling site to make people recycle more, then make that clear in the write up. And put the cache maybe at a park next to the recycling center to keep me out of the glass. Thanks.

 

Agree with a lot of what you're saying here. I can't stand cache sites that are covered in litter and/or glass - which so many urban caches seem to be - and whenever I have commented on that have been told words to the effect of "what do you expect from an urban cache", as if because it is not in the countryside it can be anywhere. Truth be told, it can be anywhere - but why would you choose to take me to somewhere rubbish?

 

One problem with this is that the site may not have had litter when the cache was placed, and although guidelines state that the owner should be regularly maintaining their cache, many do not. And even if they do, there is nothing to stop something happening after such a maintenance visit. Unless the litter and/or glass looks to have been there for sometime, then I don't think it is always fair to blame the cache setter for something which may be out of their control.

 

In terms of the cache of the OP of this thread, glass was an issue because of a nearby recycling centre. It is probable, from what the owner says, that this is rarely the case (this being the first time she has come across it), in which case it was hardly her fault and not expected. But the Web Rat wasn't to know that when he came to the site. (Although it was noted in the cache description - even before it was recently changed - that there was a recycling centre in the vicinity.)

 

As for human waste, thankfully I've only found one literally crappy cache. Not so thankfully, I stood in said human waste. Ironically, even had it not been for the presence of faeces, the cache would have been crappy. When someone had used the location as a toilet, it was pretty much the icing on the cake.

Share this post


Link to post

This is how I try to place of my caches but I try to make the the cache fit the location rather than just find a place to put a film can. I think this is the perfect plan for urban caches.

 

Here is one I put in a bench. I used to get more DNF's but not so much anymore. It is on the underside of a park bench. For caches like this I use Tyvek to make the logs. (They are impervious to water.)

 

kapaaaabh.jpg

 

japajaabh.jpg

 

japaiaabh.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
The same thing that makes any cache good... or bad. It's largely a matter of personal preference.
Yep. Here are some cache types that I enjoy:
  • caches that feature public art (including blinkers on public sculptures)
  • caches with 4-star camouflage (but be sure the location can withstand repeated, prolonged searching)
  • puzzle caches with great "Aha!" moments (and it's a fun bonus if the location is somewhere that fits the theme)

Share this post


Link to post

Ref GC1XBC3

 

For avoidance of doubt TWR, the cacher is a she not a he - we're not all 'single males' ;-)

 

The village location is beautiful and well worth a visit - a number of visit locations were already mentioned in the cache description prior to my editing suggestions provided by nick_h_nz (thankyou btw!).

 

As the area is a tarmaced carpark, I see no reason why wheelchair access is questionable?! And I believe there was mention of the recycling point - although I have expanded this notation now.

 

I removed the notes from my log for 2 reasons

1. I didn't want my log to be a clashing of horns over what is and isn't a good cache site as our views were merely different but not necessarily wrong (as is also evident from the posts on this thread). So I set up this thread and pointed to it.

2. Your note was agressive and not terribly constructive. I'd be happy to forward you my correspondence with nick_h_nz for future ref.

 

The dnf was removed in error while I was removing the notes (eeehhh, women and technology eh?) and I have already emailed the reviewer and asked for it to be re-instated. Again, apologies for this.

 

Ooooh, what a hornets nest.

 

But, this afternoon we're going out to do a few of your ESE's TWR! - I have no doubt they will be as good as the previous ones we've done of yours :P and I'm also introducing a newbie too. What fun!

Edited by darepabe

Share this post


Link to post
One problem with this is that the site may not have had litter when the cache was placed, and although guidelines state that the owner should be regularly maintaining their cache, many do not. And even if they do, there is nothing to stop something happening after such a maintenance visit. Unless the litter and/or glass looks to have been there for sometime, then I don't think it is always fair to blame the cache setter for something which may be out of their control.
The 'maintenance' guideline does not require that cache owners remove any litter that is in the area of the cache.

Share this post


Link to post

A good urban cache is one where I can search without attracting the attention of The Law, and also one that does not smell like poo. :P If the site is actually interesting or relevent in some way, then double bonus points for the hider....

Share this post


Link to post

The OP is specifically talking about GC1XBC3.

 

To the OP...why did you use a ? (unknown) for cache size? You mention in the clues that it's a nano - why not choose micro size? One thing that makes an urban cache (or any cache) more enjoyable is when the size is clearly spelled out unless knowing the size would somehow be a spoiler.

 

It seems, like many other cache planters, we mis-interpreted the guide and understood a 'micro' to be the film canisters and therefore our container (being approx 1cm long) was a nano. Why are they called nanos if they are infact micros? Lesson learnt :P (Although I do wonder why the reviewer has not pointed this out if it is such an issue as it clearly says in the description that it's a nano?)

 

As a young family, we do this for fun and it gets the kids outdoors for a few hours without too much of the my-legs-hurt-are-we-there-yet syndrome. We hadn't realised the whole 'sport' was such a hotbed of political quagmire B) and we certainly didn't lay our (few) caches in order to disgruntle people or cause anarchy :D

Share this post


Link to post
... We hadn't realised the whole 'sport' was such a hotbed of political quagmire :P and we certainly didn't lay our (few) caches in order to disgruntle people or cause anarchy B)

Welcome to the forums.

Share this post


Link to post

...As a young family, we do this for fun and it gets the kids outdoors for a few hours without too much of the my-legs-hurt-are-we-there-yet syndrome....

 

Stop there. Do that. Enjoy like you already know you do.

 

If you happen to enjoy the political quagmire part of this activity, then join in the forum fray and add one more point of fun to the mix.

 

Personally I find I tend to get out what I bring to this activity. Espeically with urban caches. If I'm hot and thirsty, a wally world parking lot cache is a thing of beauty. If I'm just starting out for the day and my first cache is that same wally world parking lot cache. Yuck. Now if the hider knew about a spring that just happens to have as it's source the back side of the wally world parking lot which starts a local creek. Well heck, that's a home run to me either hot and thirsty or fresh and jaded because in my world it's interesting either way.

Share this post


Link to post

I have noticed that, in general, the more smileys a person has, the more they start to demand better caches. One would think that more smilies make people more happy but it seems to make them more grumpy....

 

That's because they forgot the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility. Because they forget that they are the ones suffering from the law, they are the ones who need to do the work to make each cache more exicting than the last so their Marginal Utility can at least remain constant. If they had reversed the order of finds the caches they praised at first and the ones they are lamenting now would be reversed.

 

This law also applies to ding dongs. I love the things. When I buy a box the first is great the second is good and the 12th makes me sick. So I tend to snarf a few and then give away the rest of the box. Then wait until the fullness of time before I get another box becasue a second box right after the first starts me out at "sick" and not "great".

 

That's a lot of words to say "you get out caching what you bring to caching"

Share this post


Link to post

When someone had used the location as a toilet, it was pretty much the icing on the cake.

 

Or in this case, the crap on the cache? :PB)

Share this post


Link to post

It seems, like many other cache planters, we mis-interpreted the guide and understood a 'micro' to be the film canisters and therefore our container (being approx 1cm long) was a nano. Why are they called nanos if they are infact micros? Lesson learnt :P (Although I do wonder why the reviewer has not pointed this out if it is such an issue as it clearly says in the description that it's a nano?)

 

As a young family, we do this for fun and it gets the kids outdoors for a few hours without too much of the my-legs-hurt-are-we-there-yet syndrome. We hadn't realised the whole 'sport' was such a hotbed of political quagmire B) and we certainly didn't lay our (few) caches in order to disgruntle people or cause anarchy :D

 

... and there you have unwittingly peered into yet another can of worms, the regular debate about "Should nano caches get their own size category?" :blink:

 

From the Guidelines the definition of a micro cache is "Micro (35 mm film canister or smaller – less than approximately 3 ounces or .1 L – typically containing only a logbook or a logsheet)."

 

Don't worry about the "political quagmire" too much - You can avoid most of it by either not dropping in to these forums or, better still, drop in regularly but make sure you're in your thigh-high waders and have a decently hefty stick for support and occasional defence purposes. ;)

 

MrsB :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

... and there you have unwittingly peered into yet another can of worms...

 

Oh no! Shoot me now! :P

Share this post


Link to post
We mis-interpreted the guide and understood a 'micro' to be the film canisters and therefore our container (being approx 1cm long) was a nano.

It can be both. Groundspeak's definition of a micro is "35 mm film canister or smaller".

Key word in your case is "smaller".

There are folks who think nanos should get their own size, but till TPTB agrees, they are still micros.

Many nano hiders will include the word "Nano" in their description so folks will know they are looking for a very micro, micro. :P

Share this post


Link to post

The village location is beautiful and well worth a visit - a number of visit locations were already mentioned in the cache description prior to my editing suggestions provided by nick_h_nz (thankyou btw!).

 

My pleasure! In my experience, despite some previous trolling by someone who ought to know better (but then, that's what you get in this forum), the more information given on a cache page, the less likely you are to gather criticism. Yes, a traditional should be able to be found with only the co-ordinates, so noone should need to read anything on the page. (I have done this myself, when looking for a "just one more" cache, and not had any idea of the size of what I'm looking for, let alone any other information or hint.)

 

I tend to think urban caches, especially, need good and full descriptions. Not to give the game away, but to ensure cachers there is no excuse for cachers not to know the area they will be searching in. I have no idea why, but cachers seem more inclined to moan and whinge about urban caching sites, than rural caching sites. More is expected, it seems, so unless some justification is given for the site then it will get rubbished. Of my urban caches, only once cacher has rubbished a couple of them - but the manner in which he did so (and also from private correspondance by email), it is clear he had never read the cache page, so didn't understand the reasoning behind the location. Often an urban cache is not in the most attractive of settings (and by this, I don't mean strewn with litter or poo - merely that even the cleanest and freshest urban area may not be an attractive setting), but there is a very significant and/or historic reason for placing a cache there.

 

As far as the cache concerned in the OP, I've not yet visited it but at least I know what to expect. Regardless of what was in the description previously, the new cache page covers all bases and says exactly what to expect from the location, and why the cache has been placed where it is. As far as I'm concerned, if anyone went to the cache now they'd not have a reason to complain about the setting - because if they'd bothered to read the cache page, they'd have been forewarned. If it doesn't look like your cup of tea, then don't visit the cache. It really is that simple. (Unless, of course, it is all about the numbers - in which case the number chasers will visit any cache going, and then moan about them...)

 

As for nanos, I completely agree with what has been said by Dawn - if the reviewer has no problem with a nano being classed as "other", then it's a bit petty for certain members of this forum to get up on their highhorse about what is a micro and what is not. I tend to think that if the cache page clearly states the cache is a nano, then if the reviewer has given the ok for the cache to be an "other", then it is an "other". As I've already said, virtually every nano I've found over here has been listed as "other", rather than micro - and I think that is entirely appropriate. So long as you know you're looking for a nano, it's all good.

Share this post


Link to post

I have noticed that, in general, the more smileys a person has, the more they start to demand better caches. One would think that more smilies make people more happy but it seems to make them more grumpy.

 

My first find was a tupperware. My second was akin to a key holder or film canister. I was excited by all of my first finds.

I don't get as excited as the originals but continue to enjoy finding a film canister or a key holder and even still enjoy finding Tupperware. Not horribly keen on nanos but thats a different topic.

 

While I enjoy a cache in an urban park, I also enjoy a cache in a parking lot. Since not all caches are parking lots or parks, I enjoy the variety. Urban caches are urban caches. They come in all shapes and, though mostly micros, all sizes.

 

I am in it for the hunt and while I enjoy a creative hide or container, I don't begrudge the less creative.

 

It appears some people just can't find a way to be happy, or are determined to find a way to be miserable.

 

I have noticed that, in general, the more smileys a person has, the more they start to demand better caches. One would think that more smilies make people more happy but it seems to make them more grumpy....

 

That's because they forgot the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility. Because they forget that they are the ones suffering from the law, they are the ones who need to do the work to make each cache more exicting than the last so their Marginal Utility can at least remain constant. If they had reversed the order of finds the caches they praised at first and the ones they are lamenting now would be reversed.

 

This law also applies to ding dongs. I love the things. When I buy a box the first is great the second is good and the 12th makes me sick. So I tend to snarf a few and then give away the rest of the box. Then wait until the fullness of time before I get another box becasue a second box right after the first starts me out at "sick" and not "great".

 

That's a lot of words to say "you get out caching what you bring to caching"

 

I like these answers. Maybe it's because I only just passed my 100th but I still enjoy finding all caches - yep I've seen a lot of film cannisters in the woods too.

 

It's the thrill of the hunt!

Share this post


Link to post
... As for nanos, I completely agree with what has been said by Dawn - if the reviewer has no problem with a nano being classed as "other", then it's a bit petty for certain members of this forum to get up on their highhorse about what is a micro and what is not. I tend to think that if the cache page clearly states the cache is a nano, then if the reviewer has given the ok for the cache to be an "other", then it is an "other". As I've already said, virtually every nano I've found over here has been listed as "other", rather than micro - and I think that is entirely appropriate. So long as you know you're looking for a nano, it's all good.
I kind of agree. There's only one problem. Some people really dislike micros. These people should be able to avoid micros simply by excluding them from their pocket queries. Forcing them to read all of the cache pages to check to see if someone slipped one in by choosing a size other than 'micro' seems a little mean spirited.

 

Choosing a size other than micro simply because you disagree with the official size definitions seems like a problem that does need correction. Imagine if I felt that 'large' should be any container larger than a sandwich. If I hid a quart-sized LnL, would it not be appropriate for a reviewer to make me change it to 'regular'?

Edited by sbell111

Share this post


Link to post
... As for nanos, I completely agree with what has been said by Dawn - if the reviewer has no problem with a nano being classed as "other", then it's a bit petty for certain members of this forum to get up on their highhorse about what is a micro and what is not. I tend to think that if the cache page clearly states the cache is a nano, then if the reviewer has given the ok for the cache to be an "other", then it is an "other". As I've already said, virtually every nano I've found over here has been listed as "other", rather than micro - and I think that is entirely appropriate. So long as you know you're looking for a nano, it's all good.
I kind of agree. There's only one problem. Some people really dislike micros. These people should be able to avoid micros simply by excluding them from their pocket queries. Forcing them to read all of the cache pages to check to see if someone slipped one in by choosing a size other than 'micro' seems a little mean spirited.

 

Choosing a size other than micro simply because you disagree with the official size definitions seems like a problem that does need correction. Imagine if I felt that 'large' should be any container larger than a sandwich. If I hid a quart-sized LnL, would it not be appropriate for a reviewer to make me change it to 'regular'?

 

I don't think @nick_h_nz is disagreeing or being mean spirited, I think what he's essentially saying is it has been approved, and therefore does not fall foul of guidelines.

 

Time to fess up - I have hidden 2 nano's and selected size 'other'. I did this because I read the guidelines carefully and interpreted them as such, that my nano's would not fit criteria for a micro. Furthermore that people would be looking for a smallish container when in actual fact they should be looking for something much smaller.

 

My local reviewer obviously had no problem with this - if he had, I would have had no problem changing the size. I just didn't want to mislead cachers - and so far I've had positive reviews of both.

 

I certainly didn't select 'other' size to be mean spirited or because I had some kind of issue with the guidelines. I did it because I simple want people to go out and look for my caches and have it categorised in what seems most appropriate.

 

If people have a problem with nano's defined as 'other', they should petition Groundspeak to create a 'nano' size or tweak the guidelines to leave no doubt as to what it should be considered.

 

What else is 'other' size for anyway if not for a cache that doesn't fit the standard mold?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

×