Jump to content

People prefer micros


L0ne.R

Recommended Posts

Things that attract me to caching, and keep me doing it:

  • Endless variety
  • It gets me outside
  • I like having an excuse to play with my GPS. After all these years the GPS system is still such a novelty to me I can’t get over it – all that technology and precision, right in my hand! (If you ever want to truly begin to appreciate what we have, read the book "Longitude" by Dava Sobel.)
  • After all these years I still geek out over the very underground-ness of Geocaching. The idea that I can waltz into a public place and help myself to a hidden thingy to which all the surrounding locals are oblivious – how cool is that?
  • I thrill over clever camouflage.
  • I thrill over clever cache descriptions.
  • I thrill over any and every other bit of cleverness cachers invent, and the way that, just when I think I’ve seen it all ....
  • Caches frequently make me laugh.
  • I love solving Puzzle Caches.
  • I have met some wonderful friends.
  • I like placing my own caches.
  • After all these years, I still get a kick out of the fact that this entire hobby is presented by amateurs – people putting out free entertainment for strangers – and that everyone is invited to participate. You get to see everyone’s idea of fun, not just what some marketing team at some company thinks you will like.
  • I like writing my online logs.
  • And I like watching my find counts inch ever-upward. Not just the total count, but also the sub-counts. I am particularly proud of my Puzzle Cache total, small as it is.

.

 

Things that do not matter to me one way or the other:

  • Container size.
  • The kinds of junk-drawer scrap one finds in caches.

.

 

I have no special love (or hate) for ammo cans, and smaller containers are not a problem just because they are smaller than ammo cans. "Micro" caches have never been a bother for me just because of their size.

 

And if every single item of cache swag in existence disappeared tomorrow, never to be replaced, it would not affect my participation or enjoyment of this hobby one teeny tiny bit.

 

I don’t cache for McToys. I cache for the adventure.

 

 

Disclaimer: This post is not intended as an attempt to tell anyone else what to do, what to think, what to read or who to vote for. This post is also not intended as a suggestion that children are wrong or evil or silly for wanting to find trade items in caches. This post is meant for opinion purposes only. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead is purely coincidental. Void where prohibited. Some assembly required. List each check separately by bank number. Batteries not included. Contents may settle during shipment. Use only as directed. No other warranty expressed or implied. Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment. Postage will be paid by addressee. Subject to approval. This is not an offer to sell securities. Apply only to affected area. May be too intense for some viewers. Do not stamp. Use other side for additional listings. For recreational use only. Do not disturb. All models over 18 years of age. If condition persists, consult your physician. No user-serviceable parts inside. Freshest if eaten before date on carton. Subject to change without notice. Times approximate. Simulated picture. No postage necessary if mailed in the United States. Breaking seal constitutes acceptance of agreement. For off-road use only. As seen on TV. One size fits all. Many suitcases look alike. Contains a substantial amount of non-tobacco ingredients. Colors may, in time, fade. We have sent the forms which seem to be right for you. Slippery when wet. For office use only. Not affiliated with the American Red Cross. Drop in any mailbox. Edited for television. Keep cool; process promptly. Post office will not deliver without postage. List was current at time of printing. Return to sender, no forwarding order on file, unable to forward. Not responsible for direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages resulting from any defect, error or failure to perform. At participating locations only. Not the Beatles. Penalty for private use. See label for sequence. Substantial penalty for early withdrawal. Do not write below this line. Falling rock. Lost ticket pays maximum rate. Your cancelled check is your receipt. Add toner. Place stamp here. Avoid contact with skin. Sanitized for your protection. Be sure each item is properly endorsed. Sign here without admitting guilt. Slightly higher west of the Mississippi. Employees and their families are not eligible. Beware of dog. Contestants have been briefed on some questions before the show. Limited time offer, call now to insure prompt delivery. You must be present to win. No passes accepted for this engagement. No purchase necessary. Processed at location stamped in code at top of carton. Shading within a garment may occur. Use only in well-ventilated area. Keep away from fire or flame. Replace with same type. Approved for veterans. Booths for two or more. Check here if tax deductible. Some equipment shown is optional. Price does not include taxes. No Canadian coins. Not recommended for children. Prerecorded for this time zone. Reproduction strictly prohibited. No solicitors. No alcohol, dogs, or horses. No anchovies unless otherwise specified. Restaurant package, not for resale. List at least two alternate dates. First pull up, then pull down. Call toll free before digging. Driver does not carry cash. Some of the trademarks mentioned in this product appear for identification purposes only. Record additional transactions on back of previous stub. Decision of judges is final.

Link to comment

This is a spin-off from another recent forum topic about micros. It has been suggested that people prefer to find micro caches.

 

Do you prefer to find (not hide) micros more then regular/large cache sizes? If so, why?

 

All other things being equil I prefer finding the larger containers. They have swag and though I seldom trade I always like looking through it just in case. It adds one more piece of enjoyment on top of the hunt. It also eliminates needle in the haystack hides which I don't like. My taste runs to technical hides or easy finds after a hike.

 

Of course all other things being equil I prefer hundred dollar bills over pennies but guess which I have a lot more of?

Link to comment

As a family, we prefer larger caches over micros because we are out with children who have short attention spans. I am hopeful that when they get older, we can get them to look for something for more than 5 minutes before they ruin all the fun. In the meantime, we choose caches based on getting us all outside, active, and engaged in a family activity.

Link to comment
The problem with it is that it doesn't actually make sense.

 

If a person doesn't like micros, why would they bother searching for any, even if 90% of all local caches were micros?

 

If you read his post he says "No, I don't prefer micros." which doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't like micros. I prefer my eggs fried, but it doesn't mean I don't enjoy them scrambled too.

 

Hope this helps.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
This is a spin-off from another recent forum topic about micros. It has been suggested that people prefer to find micro caches.

 

Do you prefer to find (not hide) micros more then regular/large cache sizes? If so, why?

No, I don't prefer micros. The mere fact that I have more micros than any other in my Find stats is because so many people are hiding them instead of larger containers.
Please explain how someone hiding a micro forces your find count to increment.
I'll translate this one for ya. He has a higher percentage of micro finds in his stats because there are a higher percentage of micros in his area. Yet though his ratio of micros to other sizes is higher, it doesn't necessarily mean that he prefers micros, it's more a reflection of what kinds of caches are available to him.
Well said. I don't know how anyone could obfuscate that clear translation but I'm pretty sure a couple of people will try. :D
The problem with it is that it doesn't actually make sense.

 

If a person doesn't like micros, why would they bother searching for any, even if 90% of all local caches were micros?

 

I rather believe that most would take the tack of this wise cacher and simply filter out the micros:

Personally, the plethora of lame micros has forced me (in order to decrease frustrating caching experiences) to stop looking for micros
I bet that micros that are listed in his area do not cause his find count to increment.

 

"I bet that micros that are listed in his area do not cause his find count to increment."

 

Can that be proven scientifically?

 

I'm with you on this one though:

 

"If a person doesn't like micros, why would they bother searching for any, even if 90% of all local caches were micros?"

Edited by Team Cotati
Link to comment
This is a spin-off from another recent forum topic about micros. It has been suggested that people prefer to find micro caches.

 

Do you prefer to find (not hide) micros more then regular/large cache sizes? If so, why?

No, I don't prefer micros. The mere fact that I have more micros than any other in my Find stats is because so many people are hiding them instead of larger containers.
Please explain how someone hiding a micro forces your find count to increment.
I'll translate this one for ya. He has a higher percentage of micro finds in his stats because there are a higher percentage of micros in his area. Yet though his ratio of micros to other sizes is higher, it doesn't necessarily mean that he prefers micros, it's more a reflection of what kinds of caches are available to him.
Well said. I don't know how anyone could obfuscate that clear translation but I'm pretty sure a couple of people will try. :D
The problem with it is that it doesn't actually make sense.

 

If a person doesn't like micros, why would they bother searching for any, even if 90% of all local caches were micros?

 

I rather believe that most would take the tack of this wise cacher and simply filter out the micros:

Personally, the plethora of lame micros has forced me (in order to decrease frustrating caching experiences) to stop looking for micros
I bet that micros that are listed in his area do not cause his find count to increment.

 

"I bet that micros that are listed in his area do not cause his find count to increment."

 

Can that be proven scientifically?

No. I based my post completely on his statement that he no longer looks for micros.
Link to comment
This is a spin-off from another recent forum topic about micros. It has been suggested that people prefer to find micro caches.

 

Do you prefer to find (not hide) micros more then regular/large cache sizes? If so, why?

No, I don't prefer micros. The mere fact that I have more micros than any other in my Find stats is because so many people are hiding them instead of larger containers.
Please explain how someone hiding a micro forces your find count to increment.
I'll translate this one for ya. He has a higher percentage of micro finds in his stats because there are a higher percentage of micros in his area. Yet though his ratio of micros to other sizes is higher, it doesn't necessarily mean that he prefers micros, it's more a reflection of what kinds of caches are available to him.
Well said. I don't know how anyone could obfuscate that clear translation but I'm pretty sure a couple of people will try. :D
The problem with it is that it doesn't actually make sense.

 

If a person doesn't like micros, why would they bother searching for any, even if 90% of all local caches were micros?

 

I rather believe that most would take the tack of this wise cacher and simply filter out the micros:

Personally, the plethora of lame micros has forced me (in order to decrease frustrating caching experiences) to stop looking for micros
I bet that micros that are listed in his area do not cause his find count to increment.

 

"I bet that micros that are listed in his area do not cause his find count to increment."

 

Can that be proven scientifically?

No. I based my post completely on his statement that he no longer looks for micros.

 

OK. Got it, thanks for clearing that up so quickly.

Link to comment

You're confusing who said what.

 

Fegan said:

No, I don't prefer micros. The mere fact that I have more micros than any other in my Find stats is because so many people are hiding them instead of larger containers.

He did not say he hates micros. He said he does not prefer micros.

 

Then I, Lone R, said:

 

Personally, the plethora of lame micros has forced me (in order to decrease frustrating caching experiences) to stop looking for micros.

 

2 different people 2 different statements. I'm the one who is tired of lame micros so I filter out all micros (which I resent having to resort to, but it's what I need to do). Fegan did not lament the plethora of lame caches, only that he didn't prefer them also that it shouldn't be surmised that he prefers them simply because he has more micros then any other cache sizes in his find count.

 

As briansnat translated:

 

He has a higher percentage of micro finds in his stats because there are a higher percentage of micros in his area. Yet though his ratio of micros to other sizes is higher, it doesn't necessarily mean that he prefers micros, it's more a reflection of what kinds of caches are available to him.
Edited by Lone R
Link to comment

 

Even if we do assume ecanderson is a closet micro-hater, and we assume that his post was a rant against them, the post you quoted mentioned that the phenomenon was rare, not non existent.

If you read the entire post, you'll find that the diatribe against micros was a tongue-in-cheek "let's clear the air about how some of you feel about micros" rant, and not my own opinion on the matter at all. I'd hoped to make certain people feel better to see it in print -- before I promptly accused them of being 4WD enthusiasts who just happen to have a gc.com account and are really mostly there for the off-road ride. Big wheels, big ammo cans. "Bet you can't even get to this one with your vehicle" mentality and all that. Later, I noted that a sweeping PQ filter of micros would have left out some of my favorite caches. Stay with the thread here...

 

That said, I still maintain that a majority of micro hides aren't cleverly designed or hidden. Then again (as I also pointed out), neither are most ammo can hides.

Edited by ecanderson
Link to comment

 

If a person doesn't like micros, why would they bother searching for any, even if 90% of all local caches were micros?

 

Suppose you live in an area where that remaining 10% results in 100-200 caches within a distance that you can feasibly travel given an hours free time. In an active area, new caches are going to come along and you're going to have a steady supply of new caches to find.

 

Now suppose you live in an area, eliminating 90% of the caches within the same distance (those that can be found with an hours free time) result in only 5-10 caches. After finding those, you're then in a position that you're going to need more than an hour to find *any* caches at all.

 

In the first case, a filter may merely reduce the number of caches one can find. In the second, it may eliminate being able to cache after work, and even weekends if you can't get more than a few hours of free time to go caching.

 

Personally, I don't really like the idea of participating in a game that I rarely get to play.

Link to comment

In the first case, a filter may merely reduce the number of caches one can find. In the second, it may eliminate being able to cache after work, and even weekends if you can't get more than a few hours of free time to go caching.

Or as I noted earlier, just a lunch hour. Around here, it's already getting plenty dark (and cold) by 4:45pm this time of the year. The prime caching moment during the week occurs during an (ahem) extended lunch hour. Even extended, there's a limit to the distance the two of us can reasonably travel. I think we've wiped out every "regular" or bigger within about a 10 mile radius. At city street speeds, that's about as far as we can venture most days. So many of our current trips can only be expected to consist of a lot of micros with a few smalls thrown in for good measure.

 

Going for a walk looking for a cache during lunch (even a pretty lame one) is more fun than going for a walk and not looking for a cache at lunch... and the ones in the many Open Space areas around town can involve some pretty serious walk/bushwhack adventures.

Link to comment

The only poll I ever saw on the subject was run on the NNJC website a year or so ago. I know Internet polls are not "scientific", but I recall the percentage of those who chose that they preferred micros to be in or close to single digits.

 

Maybe NJ is different from the rest of the geocaching world, or maybe the anti micro crowd organized a campaign to skew the results, but the numbers were not out of line with what I've observed talking with the geocachers I've met and spending time in this and other geocaching forums.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
The only poll I ever saw on the subject was run on the NNJC website a year or so ago. I know Internet polls are not "scientific", but I recall the percentage of those who chose that they preferred micros to be in or close to single digits.

Maybe NJ is different from the rest of the geocaching world, or maybe the anti micro crowd organized a campaign to skew the results, but the numbers were not out of line with what I've observed talking with the geocachers I've met and spending time in this and other geocaching forums.

I particularily enjoyed the quotes around "scientific"! LOL!!

 

I think the results in that case had a lot to do with the phrasing of the question. Let's rephrase it:

 

"Do you prefer cleverly hidden caches regardless of size or do you prefer a regular or large container regardless of how it may be camouflaged?"

 

I suspect the numbers would be somewhat different with that wording.

Link to comment
The only poll I ever saw on the subject was run on the NNJC website a year or so ago. I know Internet polls are not "scientific", but I recall the percentage of those who chose that they preferred micros to be in or close to single digits.

Maybe NJ is different from the rest of the geocaching world, or maybe the anti micro crowd organized a campaign to skew the results, but the numbers were not out of line with what I've observed talking with the geocachers I've met and spending time in this and other geocaching forums.

I particularily enjoyed the quotes around "scientific"! LOL!!

 

I think the results in that case had a lot to do with the phrasing of the question. Let's rephrase it:

 

"Do you prefer cleverly hidden caches regardless of size or do you prefer a regular or large container regardless of how it may be camouflaged?"

 

I suspect the numbers would be somewhat different with that wording.

 

The results would also be very different, if you asked do you prefer micros or a sharp stick in the eye? :D
Link to comment
The only poll I ever saw on the subject was run on the NNJC website a year or so ago. I know Internet polls are not "scientific", but I recall the percentage of those who chose that they preferred micros to be in or close to single digits.

Maybe NJ is different from the rest of the geocaching world, or maybe the anti micro crowd organized a campaign to skew the results, but the numbers were not out of line with what I've observed talking with the geocachers I've met and spending time in this and other geocaching forums.

I particularily enjoyed the quotes around "scientific"! LOL!!

 

I think the results in that case had a lot to do with the phrasing of the question. Let's rephrase it:

 

"Do you prefer cleverly hidden caches regardless of size or do you prefer a regular or large container regardless of how it may be camouflaged?"

 

I suspect the numbers would be somewhat different with that wording.

 

The results would also be very different, if you asked do you prefer micros or a sharp stick in the eye? :D

Yes, they sure would!!! Probably similar to if you asked, do you prefer ammo boxes or a sharp stick in the eye?
Link to comment
The only poll I ever saw on the subject was run on the NNJC website a year or so ago. I know Internet polls are not "scientific", but I recall the percentage of those who chose that they preferred micros to be in or close to single digits.

Maybe NJ is different from the rest of the geocaching world, or maybe the anti micro crowd organized a campaign to skew the results, but the numbers were not out of line with what I've observed talking with the geocachers I've met and spending time in this and other geocaching forums.

I particularily enjoyed the quotes around "scientific"! LOL!!

 

I think the results in that case had a lot to do with the phrasing of the question. Let's rephrase it:

 

"Do you prefer cleverly hidden caches regardless of size or do you prefer a regular or large container regardless of how it may be camouflaged?"

 

I suspect the numbers would be somewhat different with that wording.

 

The results would also be very different, if you asked do you prefer micros or a sharp stick in the eye? :D

Yes, they sure would!!! Probably similar to if you asked, do you prefer ammo boxes or a sharp stick in the eye?

I was joking. You are correct. The way you phrase a question can effect the results. However, I'm not sure how useful your wording is either because "cleverly placed micro" does not reflect the typical micro that I've found... Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment

I've always preferred traditional caches, but I like micros too. Especially when you're on vacation or visiting family, and you're stuck in the middle of town. Nothing like taking a trip in town to a micro cache hidden conveniently in seemingly plain sight. Especially when you've been there before and had no idea.

Link to comment
The results would also be very different, if you asked do you prefer micros or a sharp stick in the eye? :rolleyes:
Yes, they sure would!!! Probably similar to if you asked, do you prefer ammo boxes or a sharp stick in the eye?

Well, it depends on whose eye...

 

Anyway, why is it assumed that it is only a prefer or detest response to micros? Some people are just so... binary.

Edited by Chrysalides
Link to comment

I've always preferred traditional caches, but I like micros too. Especially when you're on vacation or visiting family, and you're stuck in the middle of town. Nothing like taking a trip in town to a micro cache hidden conveniently in seemingly plain sight. Especially when you've been there before and had no idea.

I'm with you link. When I travel I often don't have much time at all to cache. The lamppost hide in the parking log of the hotel I'm staying is something I can be really grateful for. (I actually did find one like that, and another time I found an LPC at the Starbucks just down the street). But what if there is an LPC at the Starbucks down the street one direction and a hide-a-key at some historic landmark a block in the other direction. Some people say that if they have time to do only one cache, they would prefer the one a the historic landmark. They say they can't tell which is which by reading the logs (or they the don't have time to read logs from all the caches in town to find the one's that are interesting to them). I'm not sure if they think that if there were fewer LPCs at Starbucks they wouldn't have this problem. It seems to me that a traveler who wanted to get a cup of coffee might prefer the cache at Starbucks to the one at the historic landmark.

Link to comment
The results would also be very different, if you asked do you prefer micros or a sharp stick in the eye? :ph34r:
Yes, they sure would!!! Probably similar to if you asked, do you prefer ammo boxes or a sharp stick in the eye?

Well, it depends on whose eye...

 

Anyway, why is it assumed that it is only a prefer or detest response to micros? Some people are just so... binary.

It really depends on the micro, but I'm more like base 4: Great, decent, did nothing for me and are you kidding me? :rolleyes:
Link to comment

Just getting into caching - I do prefer larger ones to microcaches - more because I haven't come across many TBs or GCs - and they don't fit in micros. I currently have a GC that I'm taking with me when I go on holiday next week. Its a novelty thing!

 

In saying that I don't go out of my way to choose one size over another - I'm happy to do all the caches I can find - if I find a larger one over a micro - its a bonus!

Link to comment

I've always preferred traditional caches, but I like micros too. Especially when you're on vacation or visiting family, and you're stuck in the middle of town. Nothing like taking a trip in town to a micro cache hidden conveniently in seemingly plain sight. Especially when you've been there before and had no idea.

I'm with you link. When I travel I often don't have much time at all to cache. The lamppost hide in the parking log of the hotel I'm staying is something I can be really grateful for. (I actually did find one like that, and another time I found an LPC at the Starbucks just down the street). But what if there is an LPC at the Starbucks down the street one direction and a hide-a-key at some historic landmark a block in the other direction. Some people say that if they have time to do only one cache, they would prefer the one a the historic landmark. They say they can't tell which is which by reading the logs (or they the don't have time to read logs from all the caches in town to find the one's that are interesting to them). I'm not sure if they think that if there were fewer LPCs at Starbucks they wouldn't have this problem. It seems to me that a traveler who wanted to get a cup of coffee might prefer the cache at Starbucks to the one at the historic landmark.

 

Geocaching while traveling can add a few issues which may determine what cache or caches one may go after.

 

When I had an overnight layover in Johannesburg, South Africa I specifically chose a hotel based on it's proximity to a geocache. The fact that it was a nano didn't bother me at all. I still found it and was the only cache I had time to find in the country.

 

I often will try to bring some trackables with me when I travel, so in that case a cache which is large enough to hold a TB would be my preference. When I was in Rome I was glad to get the cache at the Colesseum but I also managed to get a couple of hours free to take a walk to a larger cache where I could drop in a couple of TBs. I also picked up a really nice lanyard from an Italian forestry service from that cache.

 

If it's just between a larger cache and a micro near a historic site, it depends more on the nature on the historic site. I may be in Barcelona in the spring so I checked out the caching scene there. It will depend on where I stay over night but right now the cache that I want to find that is highest on my list is a micro at Sagrada Familia. I may never get a change to visit Barcelona again so visiting a must-see landmark trumps cache size preferences.

 

When I'm traveling on business I will often not have a car so caches in close proximity of where I would be staying or conduction my business will get preference over larger caches.

Link to comment
"cleverly placed micro" does not reflect the typical micro that I've found...

"Cleverly Placed" would account for roughly 1% of the micros I've located. :rolleyes:

Not sure how you would define clever. Most micros I've found I would consider cleverly placed. Most people agree that first LPC was cleverly placed. My attitude then is that every LPC is cleverly placed. The hider has found a spot that is not likely to be noticed by muggles and that geocachers will be able to find (easy for those that have seen it before and harder if you've never seen one). You may want to say that few micros have an original placement, but you would find an even smaller percentage of ammo cans that have an original idea for placement.

 

The other issue that some bring up, clever is translated as "wow" location. People use a subjective criteria for deciding if a location is "wow" enough for a micro (or other cache). It seems clear that many geocachers find a parking lot at a big box store or fast food restaurant sufficiently "wow" for hiding a cache and others would like a more "interesting" location.

Link to comment
Not sure how you would define clever.

clev⋅er  /ˈklɛvər/

–adjective, -er, -est.

1. mentally bright; having sharp or quick intelligence; able.

2. superficially skillful, witty, or original in character or construction; facile.

3. showing inventiveness or originality; ingenious.

I didn't realize it was such a complex statement.

I reckon you could put me down for # 2 & # 3

(I know I, personally, would never qualify for # 1) :o

 

For the record, I thought the first LPC I found was the lamest thing I've ever seen.

Early in the game I developed a huge entitlement attitude, because every cache I found was in a pretty neat place. In my defense, I can only claim naivete. I actually thought that's what the game was supposed to do. Bring folks to neat and interesting places. One day, while blissfully following my arrow, it pointed toward a big box store parking lot. I kinda thought I had fumbled the coords, as I couldn't fathom why anyone would want to bring me to a 500 acre, exhaust laden, sweltering blacktop field bristling with soccer moms in SUVs. As the distance ticked down, I noticed that I was headed right toward a light pole. Not a neat light pole, mind you, but a perfect clone of the other 500 light poles in the parking lot. I said to myself, "Self, surely no one would be lame enough to hide a cache under the light post kilt". Sadly, that's exactly what they did. A peek under the kilt revealed a film can. "Self, surely no one would use a crappy container like that, when there are gobs of containers available that actually repel moisture". Sadly, that's exactly what they did. I wasn't even surprised when I popped off the lid to find a soggy log inside.

 

Santa died for me that day. :D:rolleyes::D:ph34r:

 

Since then, I've learned to tweak the tools I have to maximize my caching pleasure.

Link to comment
Since then, I've learned to tweak the tools I have to maximize my caching pleasure.
I have too. It's called not venturing into the light pole forest. :rolleyes:

 

Here is another perspective on "clever." Do you remember playing Hide&Seek when you were a kid? What do you think you and all the other kids would do if one of the kids always hid in the front hall closet? Would they get bored with it? Would they call him "clever?" I'll admit that some kids would get bored quicker than others. It's also hard to imagine that eventually all of the kids would get bored with it (even if they won't admit it). All I know is that I'm not going to open that darn front hall closet door ever again! :ph34r:

Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment

For the record, I thought the first LPC I found was the lamest thing I've ever seen.

Early in the game I developed a huge entitlement attitude, because every cache I found was in a pretty neat place. In my defense, I can only claim naivete. I actually thought that's what the game was supposed to do. Bring folks to neat and interesting places. One day, while blissfully following my arrow, it pointed toward a big box store parking lot. I kinda thought I had fumbled the coords, as I couldn't fathom why anyone would want to bring me to a 500 acre, exhaust laden, sweltering blacktop field bristling with soccer moms in SUVs. As the distance ticked down, I noticed that I was headed right toward a light pole. Not a neat light pole, mind you, but a perfect clone of the other 500 light poles in the parking lot. I said to myself, "Self, surely no one would be lame enough to hide a cache under the light post kilt". Sadly, that's exactly what they did. A peek under the kilt revealed a film can. "Self, surely no one would use a crappy container like that, when there are gobs of containers available that actually repel moisture". Sadly, that's exactly what they did. I wasn't even surprised when I popped off the lid to find a soggy log inside.

 

Santa died for me that day. :o:rolleyes::D:ph34r:

 

Since then, I've learned to tweak the tools I have to maximize my caching pleasure.

 

Yeah, I found that cache too.

Link to comment

 

 

Disclaimer: This post is not intended as an attempt to tell anyone else what to do, what to think, what to read or who to vote for. This post is also not intended as a suggestion that children are wrong or evil or silly for wanting to find trade items in caches. This post is meant for opinion purposes only. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead is purely coincidental. Void where prohibited. Some assembly required. List each check separately by bank number. Batteries not included. Contents may settle during shipment. Use only as directed. No other warranty expressed or implied. Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment. Postage will be paid by addressee. Subject to approval. This is not an offer to sell securities. Apply only to affected area. May be too intense for some viewers. Do not stamp. Use other side for additional listings. For recreational use only. Do not disturb. All models over 18 years of age. If condition persists, consult your physician. No user-serviceable parts inside. Freshest if eaten before date on carton. Subject to change without notice. Times approximate. Simulated picture. No postage necessary if mailed in the United States. Breaking seal constitutes acceptance of agreement. For off-road use only. As seen on TV. One size fits all. Many suitcases look alike. Contains a substantial amount of non-tobacco ingredients. Colors may, in time, fade. We have sent the forms which seem to be right for you. Slippery when wet. For office use only. Not affiliated with the American Red Cross. Drop in any mailbox. Edited for television. Keep cool; process promptly. Post office will not deliver without postage. List was current at time of printing. Return to sender, no forwarding order on file, unable to forward. Not responsible for direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages resulting from any defect, error or failure to perform. At participating locations only. Not the Beatles. Penalty for private use. See label for sequence. Substantial penalty for early withdrawal. Do not write below this line. Falling rock. Lost ticket pays maximum rate. Your cancelled check is your receipt. Add toner. Place stamp here. Avoid contact with skin. Sanitized for your protection. Be sure each item is properly endorsed. Sign here without admitting guilt. Slightly higher west of the Mississippi. Employees and their families are not eligible. Beware of dog. Contestants have been briefed on some questions before the show. Limited time offer, call now to insure prompt delivery. You must be present to win. No passes accepted for this engagement. No purchase necessary. Processed at location stamped in code at top of carton. Shading within a garment may occur. Use only in well-ventilated area. Keep away from fire or flame. Replace with same type. Approved for veterans. Booths for two or more. Check here if tax deductible. Some equipment shown is optional. Price does not include taxes. No Canadian coins. Not recommended for children. Prerecorded for this time zone. Reproduction strictly prohibited. No solicitors. No alcohol, dogs, or horses. No anchovies unless otherwise specified. Restaurant package, not for resale. List at least two alternate dates. First pull up, then pull down. Call toll free before digging. Driver does not carry cash. Some of the trademarks mentioned in this product appear for identification purposes only. Record additional transactions on back of previous stub. Decision of judges is final.

 

Love the disclaimer. :o:ph34r::rolleyes:

 

I have one on this cache page.

Link to comment
Not sure how you would define clever.

clev⋅er  /ˈklɛvər/

–adjective, -er, -est.

1. mentally bright; having sharp or quick intelligence; able.

2. superficially skillful, witty, or original in character or construction; facile.

3. showing inventiveness or originality; ingenious.

I didn't realize it was such a complex statement.

I reckon you could put me down for # 2 & # 3

(I know I, personally, would never qualify for # 1) :rolleyes:

 

For the record, I thought the first LPC I found was the lamest thing I've ever seen.

Early in the game I developed a huge entitlement attitude, because every cache I found was in a pretty neat place. In my defense, I can only claim naivete. I actually thought that's what the game was supposed to do. Bring folks to neat and interesting places. One day, while blissfully following my arrow, it pointed toward a big box store parking lot. I kinda thought I had fumbled the coords, as I couldn't fathom why anyone would want to bring me to a 500 acre, exhaust laden, sweltering blacktop field bristling with soccer moms in SUVs. As the distance ticked down, I noticed that I was headed right toward a light pole. Not a neat light pole, mind you, but a perfect clone of the other 500 light poles in the parking lot. ...

 

There's one like that not far from where I live too. However, as it turns out the parking lot was built over an old creek bed and there is a very large culvert that runs under the parking lot from end to end. Guess where the cache is located (hint: it's not in the light pole skirt)

Link to comment

 

If a person doesn't like micros, why would they bother searching for any, even if 90% of all local caches were micros?

 

Suppose you live in an area where that remaining 10% results in 100-200 caches within a distance that you can feasibly travel given an hours free time. In an active area, new caches are going to come along and you're going to have a steady supply of new caches to find.

 

Now suppose you live in an area, eliminating 90% of the caches within the same distance (those that can be found with an hours free time) result in only 5-10 caches. After finding those, you're then in a position that you're going to need more than an hour to find *any* caches at all.

 

In the first case, a filter may merely reduce the number of caches one can find. In the second, it may eliminate being able to cache after work, and even weekends if you can't get more than a few hours of free time to go caching.

 

Personally, I don't really like the idea of participating in a game that I rarely get to play.

 

When I began playing this silly game, we would find the one cache in our area and then wait a week or three hoping that someone hid another one.

 

Fast forward to today, there's now tons of caches out there and more being hid all the time. However, if the only ones being hidden were ones that I wouldn't enjoy finding, those caches would go unfound. You see, in my mind, there is no difference between no caches to find and no caches that I enjoy.

Link to comment

Do people prefer micros?

 

Well, for all my micro's the FTF was within a couple hours.

My last cache put out is a regular and it's been 48 hours since publication with no FTF yet.

 

I don't want to speculate that it means people prefer micros though.

Edited by bittsen
Link to comment

Do people prefer micros?

 

Well, for all my micro's the FTF was within a couple hours.

My last cache put out is a regular and it's been 48 hours since publication with no FTF yet.

 

I don't want to speculate that it means people prefer micros though.

 

Makes sense to me.I'm not pro or con on this issue.From what I've learned reading the forum the game

is growing,population density is in the major cities,cities generally require smaller hides.I can't help

thinking thats all this trend is but I doubt the wilderness hides will suffer because its to beautiful out

there.I'm thinking theres alot of people in cities that just can't easily access rural areas or just want

to play in they're own backyard maybe.

Link to comment

I like having a record of all the caches I find - I have a display case with trinkets from all the caches I've found. For that reason, I don't really like microcaches. It's fun to find them wedged into small places, but I take a lot of joy out of finding a little trinket and leaving a trinket. I also really love swapping travel bugs, so I generally prefer larger caches.

 

'Wow. Wait until you get 500 caches. I'd like to see the size of your case then.

 

Or how about 10,000 like some people. You'll have to get another living room!!!

Link to comment

Do people prefer micros?

 

Well, for all my micro's the FTF was within a couple hours.

My last cache put out is a regular and it's been 48 hours since publication with no FTF yet.

 

I don't want to speculate that it means people prefer micros though.

 

Not exactly a gauge. You have to take into consideration other factors including cacher population in the area, weather, accessibility and cache density in the area.

 

But I think you already knew that.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Do people prefer micros?

 

Well, for all my micro's the FTF was within a couple hours.

My last cache put out is a regular and it's been 48 hours since publication with no FTF yet.

 

I don't want to speculate that it means people prefer micros though.

 

Not exactly a gauge. You have to take into consideration other factors including cacher population in the area, weather, accessibility and presence other caches in the area.

 

But I think you already knew that.

 

Yes, i already knew that but there is still a point to be made.

If people really preferred larger containers then they would be willing to drive longer distances, brave more severe weather and not cache just for the numbers (ie accessibility and presence to other caches in the area)

 

The point is people prefer whatever is closest and what is closest is usually micros. Hence, they must prefer micros over regular caches. Though, if a cache were a regular and close I doubt a cacher would pass it up because it isn't a micro.

Link to comment

There is a "ghost town" in my area. A large abandoned foreclosed development that is merely graveled streets and broken sidewalks, with a pond feature that they started. Its a great area within the city for cache hides. Of the 8 caches in there, only 1 is a regular cache. One is a nano, one small, the rest micros. Virtually no one goes there, except for some ornithologists who are surveying the birds, and some folks who walk their dogs there. Given that the area was ideal for regular caches, Ive been wondering why folks placed smaller caches (except for 2 that were cleverly placed). The regular placed there didnt cost much to place. Whatever the reason, I enjoyed all the caches there. Its a cool area. Quite apocalyptic.

Link to comment
There is a "ghost town" in my area. A large abandoned foreclosed development that is merely graveled streets and broken sidewalks, with a pond feature that they started. Its a great area within the city for cache hides. Of the 8 caches in there, only 1 is a regular cache. One is a nano, one small, the rest micros. Virtually no one goes there, except for some ornithologists who are surveying the birds, and some folks who walk their dogs there. Given that the area was ideal for regular caches, Ive been wondering why folks placed smaller caches (except for 2 that were cleverly placed). The regular placed there didnt cost much to place. Whatever the reason, I enjoyed all the caches there. Its a cool area. Quite apocalyptic.
That sounds like an area that I would love to explore! The caches are just a bonus...
Link to comment

Do people prefer micros?

 

Well, for all my micro's the FTF was within a couple hours.

My last cache put out is a regular and it's been 48 hours since publication with no FTF yet.

 

I don't want to speculate that it means people prefer micros though.

 

Not exactly a gauge. You have to take into consideration other factors including cacher population in the area, weather, accessibility and presence other caches in the area.

 

But I think you already knew that.

 

Yes, i already knew that but there is still a point to be made.

If people really preferred larger containers then they would be willing to drive longer distances, brave more severe weather and not cache just for the numbers (ie accessibility and presence to other caches in the area)

 

The point is people prefer whatever is closest and what is closest is usually micros. Hence, they must prefer micros over regular caches. Though, if a cache were a regular and close I doubt a cacher would pass it up because it isn't a micro.

 

Thats a pretty cool picture on the page. I would definitely go out there to find it if I was nearby.

 

lmsnow.jpg

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment

Do people prefer micros?

 

Well, for all my micro's the FTF was within a couple hours.

My last cache put out is a regular and it's been 48 hours since publication with no FTF yet.

 

I don't want to speculate that it means people prefer micros though.

 

Not exactly a gauge. You have to take into consideration other factors including cacher population in the area, weather, accessibility and presence other caches in the area.

 

But I think you already knew that.

 

Yes, i already knew that but there is still a point to be made.

If people really preferred larger containers then they would be willing to drive longer distances, brave more severe weather and not cache just for the numbers (ie accessibility and presence to other caches in the area)

 

The point is people prefer whatever is closest and what is closest is usually micros. Hence, they must prefer micros over regular caches. Though, if a cache were a regular and close I doubt a cacher would pass it up because it isn't a micro.

 

Thats a pretty cool picture on the page. I would definitely go out there to find it if I was nearby.

 

lmsnow.jpg

Me too! :)
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...