Pointless caches

[+L0ne.R]

In your example, it would appear that the caches that group A are finding are quite popular.

 

How are you defining the word popular? Are you suggesting that they are:

 

regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general

 

or

 

that they are simply found a lot, and therefore you are agreeing with Markwell.

Edited December 28, 2009 by Lone R

[+sbell111]

In your example, it would appear that the caches that group A are finding are quite popular.

 

How are you defining the word popular? Are you suggesting that they are:

 

regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general

 

or

 

that they are simply found a lot, and therefore you are agreeing with Markwell.

They fit both of your definitions.

[+Moose Mob]

The main thing is to have fun. If you are doing something that is not fun, either find a way to make it fun or stop doing it.

 

When I am finding parking lot micro caches, I tend to enjoy it because of the people I am with, not always the cache itself. I do not expect the cache to entertain me, I can do that on my own.

[+L0ne.R]

Frequency of finds is a perfectly fine way to determine whether or not a cache is popular. Where it fails is determining whether the cache is 'better' than any other specific cache. That is always going to be an individual decision.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/popular

1. regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general: a popular preacher.

2. regarded with favor, approval, or affection by an acquaintance or acquaintances: He's not very popular with me just now.

3. of, pertaining to, or representing the people, esp. the common people: popular discontent.

4. of the people as a whole, esp. of all citizens of a nation or state qualified to participate in an election: popular suffrage; the popular vote; popular representation.

5. prevailing among the people generally: a popular superstition.

6. suited to or intended for the general masses of people: popular music.

7. adapted to the ordinary intelligence or taste: popular lectures on science.

8. suited to the means of ordinary people; not expensive: popular prices on all tickets.

I think the fifth definition of "popular" is what you are referring to: "prevailing among the people generally" which talks to frequency.

I was referring to either of the first two definitions "favor, approval, or affection", which indeed speaks to whether a cache is "better", which of course is a matter of opinion.

 

So I'll state it in a way that we can agree upon.

 

The frequency of finds on a cache does not make it a "better" cache.

 

Do we agree?

 

Oh heck, I should have continued reading before I made my similar reply and also referenced the dictionary definition of popular. Glad to see that we agree about the use of the different meanings to the word 'popular'. To sbell finds=favored. I doubt sbell will admit otherwise but I'm happy to read that most people don't come to that conclusion.

[+Moose Mob]

I usually don't partake in these debates, but I will do it this week so I can make a New Year's resolution to stop getting involved in these.

 

Here it goes...

Preferred is an individual perspective or opinion.

Frequency is a quantifiable statistic (please only use the non-radio wave definition).

Popular can be either depending on context.

 

So... if baseball players hit more doubles than home runs, does that mean that doubles are more popular? Strike outs are more popular?

 

I think we would make more headway on the "just have fun" approach to the issue.

[+Border Caz]

 

Absolutly correct, old boy! And, while I'm buying my whisky, I can grab that nano in the car park.

 

I am considering hiding a series of nanos in pub cark parks

 

Nanos in pub car parks - excellent idea, make sure they're in Shropshire or close by - these will take me to interesting places which I may not have seen before, and will involve possibly fairly long hikes as I'll have to walk home after I've partaken of the choice of refreshment on offer.

[+L0ne.R]

Some cachers are omnivorous and are happy mixing in those cookies with the pie and cakes. Other cachers are more selective, and happily drive right past the cookies unless they appear to be freshly baked chocolate chip ones. All they want are the special pies and cakes.

 

Ain't life grand when we have all of these choices in front of us?

 

I agree, variety is grand but let's not laud the no-name dollar-store biscuit over the freshly baked with care and attention, swiss chocolate ganache torte.

[+StarBrand]

I am very much a tadpole (only 8 so far!) but I am already getting a little jaded. What is the point of a geocache in a parking lot? It sort of goes against the spirit of geocaching. Yeah, sure I want to find a lot of them, but worthwhile caches. I don't want a find a cache just to say I found one; an intergral part is the journey and the GZ locale. Poking around in a parking lot just doesn't seem right.

I agree generally with that line of thinking.

 

Others don't. Such is Geocaching.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

I am very much a tadpole (only 8 so far!) but I am already getting a little jaded. What is the point of a geocache in a parking lot? It sort of goes against the spirit of geocaching. Yeah, sure I want to find a lot of them, but worthwhile caches. I don't want a find a cache just to say I found one; an intergral part is the journey and the GZ locale. Poking around in a parking lot just doesn't seem right.

Someone once said "If you aren't having fun, you aren't doing it right" or something to that effect.

 

The point is (as others have pointed out) do the caches you like and skip the ones you don't. It's very simple. And the GREAT thing is that there is plenty of variety in the the world that everyone can CHOOSE to do what they like doing.

 

Choose happiness, repel negativity, never see walls.

 

Personally, I would not want to search for a cache on the top of a cliff, but I understand that other people would enjoy it immensely.

 

The journey is what you make it. I find peace and beauty driving somewhere and observing the magnificent sunset (even if I happen to be in a parking lot).

[CoyoteRed]

My personal preference is finding caches that would be included in a introductory videos on geocaching. I've yet to see one that highlighted a micro in a parking lot as "what the hobby is about."

 

After a long day of DNF's I'll still walk right past a parking lot micro. Why? Regardless of the experiences of the day, it's still a waste of time. To bastardize a popular bumper sticker, "A DNF on a good cache is better than a find on a PLM any day." I live by that. I've gone on hikes for caches I've already found and I've DNFed caches after hard hikes. Never once did I console myself with a PLM, nor wish I had gone after easier caches.

 

I equate the idea of finding a PLM after a day of failures with, say, a rough day of rock climbing failures. Why would you console yourself with the "victory" of climbing a step stool?

[+wimseyguy]

I second the nomination for vodka as the spirit of geocaching but if the whiskey lobby wins, lets at least make it a good whiskey... like Beam black... or Makers mark... no JD crap.

 

Heathens!!! Proper whisky doesn't have an E before the Y !!!!

 

 

Absolutly correct, old boy! And, while I'm buying my whisky, I can grab that nano in the car park.

 

I am considering hiding a series of nanos in pub cark parks

 

Like these?

 

They don't need to be nanos, film cans and keyholders work just fine. And the logs are so much easier to sign.

[4wheelin_fool]

My personal preference is finding caches that would be included in a introductory videos on geocaching. I've yet to see one that highlighted a micro in a parking lot as "what the hobby is about."

 

After a long day of DNF's I'll still walk right past a parking lot micro. Why? Regardless of the experiences of the day, it's still a waste of time. To bastardize a popular bumper sticker, "A DNF on a good cache is better than a find on a PLM any day." I live by that. I've gone on hikes for caches I've already found and I've DNFed caches after hard hikes. Never once did I console myself with a PLM, nor wish I had gone after easier caches.

 

I equate the idea of finding a PLM after a day of failures with, say, a rough day of rock climbing failures. Why would you console yourself with the "victory" of climbing a step stool?

 

Why? You have to sometimes take baby steps to get your caching mojo back. DNFs on difficult caches mean that you might be out of your leauge, and need some basic remedial training.

[+Folenator]

Wow!Who knew such a simple declaration would stir up such a storm?! I am glad to have heard so many diverse opinions and have had my mind changed to some extent. thank you all for sharing your thoughts!

[+Markwell]

Sure, but what you are missing is that in your example, Group A cachers clearly feel that those caches are 'better'.

 

Of course, none of this changes the fact that the very fact that this type of cache is hidden and found with great frequency does, indeed, prove that it is 'popular'. (Remember, the issue to which you responded was whether these caches are 'popular', not whether they are 'better', which is a completely personal decision.)

I would concede that these caches are "popular" within the set of cachers that like this type of cache. But are they more "popular" overall?

 

If I look at the first entry on my definition list ("regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general"), I cannot infer that in general they are regarded with favor, approval or affection. In fact, in my "caching in a vaccuum" example, 50% of the people do NOT regard them with favor, approval or affection. Taking the line reasoning being espoused to the extreme, it seems that you're saying that if even one person likes something, it's "popular" because it's popular to that person. I disagree with this statement because the definition of "popular" above is "regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general."

 

I play a game called Geodashing. A GPS enthusiast named "Scout" uses a computer program to generate pseudo random coordinates each month. Within that month players try to get to within 100 meters of the locations and report back what they see and experience. There's no "treasure box" to find. There's no trinkets to trade. There's no issues with people hiding things on land manager's property (in fact a good portion of them are on private property, which necessitates talking to land owners for permission to "find" the location). In 2009, there have only been 95 people in the entire world to TRY Geodashing. Only 63 players found or attempted more than one location. Only 51 of those 95 players played in more than one month. Of the individuals that played in January of 2009, only 11 have found points in Sept-Dec). This is world-wide.

 

Is Geodashing popular?

To the people that play it? Yes.

Is it "regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general"? No.

[+The Jester]

Frequency of finds is a perfectly fine way to determine whether or not a cache is popular. Where it fails is determining whether the cache is 'better' than any other specific cache. That is always going to be an individual decision.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/popular

1. regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general: a popular preacher.

2. regarded with favor, approval, or affection by an acquaintance or acquaintances: He's not very popular with me just now.

3. of, pertaining to, or representing the people, esp. the common people: popular discontent.

4. of the people as a whole, esp. of all citizens of a nation or state qualified to participate in an election: popular suffrage; the popular vote; popular representation.

5. prevailing among the people generally: a popular superstition.

6. suited to or intended for the general masses of people: popular music.

7. adapted to the ordinary intelligence or taste: popular lectures on science.

8. suited to the means of ordinary people; not expensive: popular prices on all tickets.

I think the fifth definition of "popular" is what you are referring to: "prevailing among the people generally" which talks to frequency.

I was referring to either of the first two definitions "favor, approval, or affection", which indeed speaks to whether a cache is "better", which of course is a matter of opinion.

 

So I'll state it in a way that we can agree upon.

 

The frequency of finds on a cache does not make it a "better" cache.

 

Do we agree?

Sure, but what you are missing is that in your example, Group A cachers clearly feel that those caches are 'better'.

 

Of course, none of this changes the fact that the very fact that this type of cache is hidden and found with great frequency does, indeed, prove that it is 'popular'. (Remember, the issue to which you responded was whether these caches are 'popular', not whether they are 'better', which is a completely personal decision.)

It seems what you are both missing, is that all 33 caches in the example are equally "popular" - they all have 500 finds. Yes, there are more total finds for group A, but that's a time factor (quicker to get to) - each cache has an equal number of finds.

[+sbell111]

Several years ago, I found myself in a hotel near LAX with some time to kill. A few coworkers were going to Manhattan Beach, so I walked over, finding some caches along the way. When I arrived at the beach, they asked me what I had been doing. I explained the game to them and called up the nearest cache to let them check it out. The nearest one happened to be a micro hidden in a parking garage. It didn't really spin my top, but they thought it was awesome. A few of them still cache today.

 

My point is, that many people like these mundane caches that some would turn up their nose at. Those people would say that the people complaining about these caches don't truly understand what this game is about.

Edited December 28, 2009 by sbell111

[+Markwell]

It seems what you are both missing, is that all 33 caches in the example are equally "popular" - they all have 500 finds. Yes, there are more total finds for group A, but that's a time factor (quicker to get to) - each cache has an equal number of finds.

My last tangental statement on the topic:

 

I didn't state that there were only 33 caches being found. Just that each of the 500 people found 30 caches and that each of the other 500 found 3. The 30 caches for each of the 500 people could be unique caches (or not) and the 3 found by the other 500 could be unique (or not). So it could be anywhere from 33 caches to 16,500 caches. In either extreme (33 or 16,500) each cache would be found with the same frequency (either 500 times or once).

 

I still believe that frequency≠popularity by the definition I used: "regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general".

 

I don't think that "frequency" is the most "popular" use of the word "popular". If sbell111 would like to take this into private messaging to try and change my mind about the usage of "popular" in this context, I'd be fine with that.

[+sbell111]

Sure, but what you are missing is that in your example, Group A cachers clearly feel that those caches are 'better'.

 

Of course, none of this changes the fact that the very fact that this type of cache is hidden and found with great frequency does, indeed, prove that it is 'popular'. (Remember, the issue to which you responded was whether these caches are 'popular', not whether they are 'better', which is a completely personal decision.)

I would concede that these caches are "popular" within the set of cachers that like this type of cache. But are they more "popular" overall?

 

If I look at the first entry on my definition list ("regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general"), I cannot infer that in general they are regarded with favor, approval or affection. In fact, in my "caching in a vaccuum" example, 50% of the people do NOT regard them with favor, approval or affection. Taking the line reasoning being espoused to the extreme, it seems that you're saying that if even one person likes something, it's "popular" because it's popular to that person. I disagree with this statement because the definition of "popular" above is "regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general."

The bulk of your post seems to hinge on the highlighted bit. While it should not need to be noted that I never made this argument that you appear to be attributing to me, the logic that you used to get to that place is horribly flawed.

I play a game called Geodashing. A GPS enthusiast named "Scout" uses a computer program to generate pseudo random coordinates each month. Within that month players try to get to within 100 meters of the locations and report back what they see and experience. There's no "treasure box" to find. There's no trinkets to trade. There's no issues with people hiding things on land manager's property (in fact a good portion of them are on private property, which necessitates talking to land owners for permission to "find" the location). In 2009, there have only been 95 people in the entire world to TRY Geodashing. Only 63 players found or attempted more than one location. Only 51 of those 95 players played in more than one month. Of the individuals that played in January of 2009, only 11 have found points in Sept-Dec). This is world-wide.

 

Is Geodashing popular?

To the people that play it? Yes.

Is it "regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general"? No.

So geocaching doesn't meet your definition of 'popular', what's your point?

 

Frankly, I find it a little off putting that you are trying to argue against a concept because you don't agree with every single definition of word.

Edited December 28, 2009 by sbell111

[LalsConstant]

I'm a real newbie too, with only TWO logged! Yeah!

 

But in defense of such caches, I personally have actually sought out a couple that were easy, and kind of "pointless", because I'm still learning my orientation skills. There's got to be some simple ones in easily accessible, trivial areas for goobers like me to cut their teeth on right?

 

Plus even the two I've found so far, no they weren't exciting wonderful places, BUT they did make me look around a little and see something I in this town I hadn't really seen before. Then again I've a bit of a fascination with abandoned buildings, gutters, alleys and the other unsightly artifacts humans sometimes leave behind.

 

On top of that they took me to some dirty public places that I helped clean up a little bit.

 

The next series I'm going after is actually a series of 10 caches hidden in a suburban neighborhood. I want to see the hiding techniques employed; I figure if my interest survives that long to find all those I may actually try to hide one myself.

 

Also, let's consider that the mobility impaired may be playing.

 

Heck of a first post huh.

[+sbell111]

It seems what you are both missing, is that all 33 caches in the example are equally "popular" - they all have 500 finds. Yes, there are more total finds for group A, but that's a time factor (quicker to get to) - each cache has an equal number of finds.

My last tangental statement on the topic:

 

I didn't state that there were only 33 caches being found. Just that each of the 500 people found 30 caches and that each of the other 500 found 3. The 30 caches for each of the 500 people could be unique caches (or not) and the 3 found by the other 500 could be unique (or not). So it could be anywhere from 33 caches to 16,500 caches. In either extreme (33 or 16,500) each cache would be found with the same frequency (either 500 times or once).

 

I still believe that frequency≠popularity by the definition I used: "regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general".

 

I don't think that "frequency" is the most "popular" use of the word "popular". If sbell111 would like to take this into private messaging to try and change my mind about the usage of "popular" in this context, I'd be fine with that.

Why would I care? Besides, it simply isn't necessary.

 

If I were to comment that the guy at the store does a good job of boxing my groceries, would I be misusing the word 'box' simply because you prefer the word to refer to fisticuffs in the square circle?

 

Words have multiple definitions. Welcome to the english language.

Edited December 28, 2009 by sbell111

[CoyoteRed]

Why? You have to sometimes take baby steps to get your caching mojo back. DNFs on difficult caches mean that you might be out of your leauge, and need some basic remedial training.

Finding a PLM doesn't help with hiking to a cache you've already found. You've found it already.

 

Finding a PLM doesn't help with DNFing on a hard cache, if the cache is beyond your physical or mental reach.

 

Finding a PLM doesn't help with finding a SAW can. I know because we have one that micro fanatics seem to have a hard time finding. Go figure.

 

If there's no adventure in it for me, then it's a waste of my time.

[CoyoteRed]

Also, let's consider that the mobility impaired may be playing.

The mobility impaired can go to parks and nice places. How about we place caches there, too.

 

Oh, wait, we already do. So, why PLMs? (Parking Lot Micros)

[+Chrysalides]

They don't need to be nanos, film cans and keyholders work just fine. And the logs are so much easier to sign.

Especially after a couple of whiskies.

 

Thanks for the education on proper spelling, by the way. Learn something new here every day. According to wikipedia, "The Irish and American distilleries adopted the spelling 'whiskey', with the extra 'e', to distinguish their higher quality product." I guess the "higher quality" part will be subject to much debate, and belongs in the off topic forum.

[+ScottKaren]

The main thing is to have fun. If you are doing something that is not fun, either find a way to make it fun or stop doing it.

 

When I am finding parking lot micro caches, I tend to enjoy it because of the people I am with, not always the cache itself. I do not expect the cache to entertain me, I can do that on my own.

 

Bing Bing Bing! We have a winner folks!

[+Renegade Knight]

...why PLMs? (Parking Lot Micros)

 

Why not? We park there anyway.

[Skippermark]

Sometimes I'm in the mood to find some easy P&Gs, and other times I'm happy doing a long, hard cache. Whatever I do, I find that I get bored if I do the same type all the time and am thankful for a variety of types for us to find.

[+bittsen]

My comment about urban micros being more popular is beyond dispute. It's a statistical fact.

 

I didn't say they are better. That would be an opinion. Opinions are emotional. Facts are logical.

 

I stand by my statement that urban micro caches are far more popular, based solely on observations, than ammo cans in the woods. More people place urban micros and more people find urban micros. That is factual.

[+sbell111]

My comment about urban micros being more popular is beyond dispute. It's a statistical fact.

 

I didn't say they are better. That would be an opinion. Opinions are emotional. Facts are logical.

 

I stand by my statement that urban micro caches are far more popular, based solely on observations, than ammo cans in the woods. More people place urban micros and more people find urban micros. That is factual.

Great, now someone is going to argue with you about the proper definitions of 'woods' and 'urban'.

[+Sol seaker]

I too used to hate parking lot micros.

 

But then, like some others, I got injured, and could not walk 250ft.

 

I am so grateful I was able to keep up some sort of caching through this time.

 

 

Pass up those parking lot caches for now. Get a premium membership and hide them on your map.

 

Then hope one day you won't need to go search them out,

but you'll be glad they're there if you need them.

[+Sol seaker]

My comment about urban micros being more popular is beyond dispute. It's a statistical fact.

 

I didn't say they are better. That would be an opinion. Opinions are emotional. Facts are logical.

 

I stand by my statement that urban micro caches are far more popular, based solely on observations, than ammo cans in the woods. More people place urban micros and more people find urban micros. That is factual.

Great, now someone is going to argue with you about the proper definitions of 'woods' and 'urban'.

 

No, what I'll argue is the definition of "popular"

 

Main Entry: pop·u·lar

Pronunciation: \ˈpä-pyə-lər\

Function: adjective

 

1 : of or relating to the general public

2 : suitable to the majority: as a : adapted to or indicative of the understanding and taste of the majority <a popular history of the war> b : suited to the means of the majority

3 : frequently encountered or widely accepted <a popular theory>

4 : commonly liked or approved <a very popular girl>

 

synonyms see common

 

From two other dictionaries:

-regarded with great favor, approval, or affection especially by the general public

1. Widely liked or appreciated

 

So are they "Frequently encountered?"

Or are they "widely liked and appreciated"?

 

I think this is what the argument comes down to for me:

 

So are people finding micros because they're all over the place, or because they like them?

[+9Key]

 

I equate the idea of finding a PLM after a day of failures with, say, a rough day of rock climbing failures. Why would you console yourself with the "victory" of climbing a step stool?

Well said!

[+Moose Mob]

I am very much a tadpole (only 8 so far!) but I am already getting a little jaded. What is the point of a geocache in a parking lot? It sort of goes against the spirit of geocaching. Yeah, sure I want to find a lot of them, but worthwhile caches. I don't want a find a cache just to say I found one; an intergral part is the journey and the GZ locale. Poking around in a parking lot just doesn't seem right.

OK, trying to get away from the "popular" argument, I will provoke another argument or two.

 

- My "spirit of geocaching" is getting away from the TV, getting out with friends, having fun. Other people have a different view. That's fine with me.

 

- If you go caching in an urban environment, you will find urban caches. If you want ammo cans in the woods, go find caches in the woods.

 

- Once you can define what you feel a "worthwhile cache" is, you can set up pocket queries and filters and seek the caches you like. People will always hide what they want to hide. If you want folks to hide caches that meet a particular set of requirements, they will probably need to be on your payroll. Otherwise, it is pretty much an open game. We have what you want, you just need to learn how to find it.

[+sbell111]

So are they "Frequently encountered?"

Or are they "widely liked and appreciated"?

Either way, they are popular.

[+sbell111]

So are people finding micros because they're all over the place, or because they like them?

Arguments like yours discount the fact that they are 'all over the place' because people hide them often. I submit that people frequently hide them because they like them. They are popular.

[+briansnat]

So are people finding micros because they're all over the place, or because they like them?

Arguments like yours discount the fact that they are 'all over the place' because people hide them often. I submit that people frequently hide them because they like them. They are popular.

 

Or it could be because they are easier to hide. When faced with a task most people will take the easier way to accomplish it. It's human nature.

 

Anyway, since the argument is larger caches hidden in interesting areas are less popular, where are all the threads complaining about them? I would think unpopular caches would garner more threads complaining about them then wildly popular caches.

[+bittsen]

So are people finding micros because they're all over the place, or because they like them?

Arguments like yours discount the fact that they are 'all over the place' because people hide them often. I submit that people frequently hide them because they like them. They are popular.

 

Thus proving that they are popular.

 

See? It's all logical.

[+L0ne.R]

My comment about urban micros being more popular is beyond dispute. It's a statistical fact.

 

I didn't say they are better. That would be an opinion. Opinions are emotional. Facts are logical.

 

I stand by my statement that urban micro caches are far more popular, based solely on observations, than ammo cans in the woods. More people place urban micros and more people find urban micros. That is factual.

 

So why do you and sbell keep using the word 'popular'? Why use the word 'popular' when that word also means: regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general. Use a word/phrase that really defines what you mean.....'statistically' urban micros are planted and found more then any other cache.

[+L0ne.R]

So are people finding micros because they're all over the place, or because they like them?

Arguments like yours discount the fact that they are 'all over the place' because people hide them often. I submit that people frequently hide them because they like them. They are popular.

I submit that people frequently hide them because they are cheap (some have said they stopped hiding regular size caches because they cost too much to maintain - i.e. the swag deteriorates and needs to be restocked), they are zero investment (ties into the swag thing but in addition - free film canister, scrap paper from the kitchen drawer, no pencil), they are easier to hide.

[+bittsen]

My comment about urban micros being more popular is beyond dispute. It's a statistical fact.

 

I didn't say they are better. That would be an opinion. Opinions are emotional. Facts are logical.

 

I stand by my statement that urban micro caches are far more popular, based solely on observations, than ammo cans in the woods. More people place urban micros and more people find urban micros. That is factual.

 

So why do you and sbell keep using the word 'popular'? Why use the word 'popular' when that word also means: regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general. Use a word/phrase that really defines what you mean.....'statistically' urban micros are planted and found more then any other cache.

 

Can I use the word populous?

 

I didn't get the accepted word usage pamphlet when I got my membership here so I don't know what words are, or are not, allowed.

 

I use the word popular because they are, um, popular.

 

Define Popular

Widely liked or appreciated: Urban micros are found more frequently that larger caches in the woods which would indicate a favor towards urban micros, hence, they are widely liked

Liked by acquaintances; sought after for company: Urban micros are sought out more than ammo cans in the woods

Of, representing, or carried on by the people at large: People place more urban micros than larger ammo cans in the woods

Fit for, adapted to, or reflecting the taste of the people at large: See above

Accepted by or prevalent among the people in general: See above

Suited to or within the means of ordinary people: Ordinary people place more urban micros than ammo cans in the woods and more people find them as well

 

<sarcasm>

You are right I don't know why I would use the word "popular"

</sarcasm>

 

[+slukster]

So are people finding/hiding micros because they're all over the place, or because they like them?

Arguments like yours discount the fact that they are 'all over the place' because people hide them often. I submit that people frequently hide them because they like them. They are popular.

That would not be the case for me. I have hidden quite a few urban micros here in NYC not because I enjoy finding/hiding micros but because they are pretty much the only size cache that can be hidden in that environment. I would love to hide larger caches but concealing them would be much tougher. I don't mind micros but I do prefer a nice hike through the woods over a park and grab, regardless of the cache size . I did hide one cache in NYC that is a size small (small L n L) and I get frequent logs stating how large the container is for a NYC hide.

Edited December 28, 2009 by slukster

[+Renegade Knight]

...Here it goes...

Preferred is an individual perspective or opinion.

Frequency is a quantifiable statistic (please only use the non-radio wave definition).

Popular can be either depending on context....

 

Nice. I agree.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

I am very much a tadpole (only 8 so far!) but I am already getting a little jaded. What is the point of a geocache in a parking lot? It sort of goes against the spirit of geocaching. Yeah, sure I want to find a lot of them, but worthwhile caches. I don't want a find a cache just to say I found one; an intergral part is the journey and the GZ locale. Poking around in a parking lot just doesn't seem right.

OK, so I mentioned in my other post that I had found ways to enjoy these...Here's how I do it. There usually is nothing to trade in these Caches, and they are not a challenge to get to of find(but maybe to retreive). What I have done to make them enjoyable for me(and others too) is to find unique and interesting things that I can leave behind. I have several Games(with prizes) that I have developed, and the gamepieces can fit in these kinds of Caches. I also have several different kings of swag items I can leave. At least I get to leave a trade item, which should be a pleasant surprise for the next finder. That makes it more fun for me too.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

As Markwell suggested, please take the word definition/etymology discussion to PMs, emails, or the Off-Topic forum. Thanks.

[+Ed_S]

I second the nomination for vodka as the spirit of geocaching but if the whiskey lobby wins, lets at least make it a good whiskey... like Beam black... or Makers mark... no JD crap.

 

Heathens!!! Proper whisky doesn't have an E before the Y !!!!

 

 

I'll drink to that!!

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

Red, you're killing me here. The day I buy into that argument is that day that the number of pointless parking lot caches is proportional to the shear number of "physically challenged cachers" who can't walk 1/4 mile down a bike trail to find a tupperware container 10 feet into the bushes. How many of these physically challenged cachers, whom apparently need to cache in the Wal-Mart parking lot, do you know? Enough of them that they need 50% or more of all caches in many urban/suburban areas placed on their alleged behalf?

 

I would gladly give up every parking lot micro that I enjoy if I could only regain my ability to walk that 1/4 mile down a trail again.

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

So are people finding micros because they're all over the place, or because they like them?

 

I cant wait to go caching with Mike on his next day off. Im excited to go look for micros. I like hunting micros. I look for them because I like them, not because they are all over the place. I like hunting regulars too. I do not choose which cache to look for based on size.

[+Folenator]

What is the point of a geocache in a parking lot? It sort of goes against the spirit of geocaching.

 

The home page of this website used to say something like "All you need is a GPS and a sense of adventure",

and it now says we are "...adventure seekers equipped with GPS devices", so in that light you probably are correct. There isn't a heck of a lot of adventure in visiting strip malls. At least for those of you who don't live in New Jersey.

 

Yes, that is the point I was trying to make.

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

The definition of adventure is subjective.

[+Folenator]

My personal preference is finding caches that would be included in a introductory videos on geocaching. I've yet to see one that highlighted a micro in a parking lot as "what the hobby is about."

 

After a long day of DNF's I'll still walk right past a parking lot micro. Why? Regardless of the experiences of the day, it's still a waste of time. To bastardize a popular bumper sticker, "A DNF on a good cache is better than a find on a PLM any day." I live by that. I've gone on hikes for caches I've already found and I've DNFed caches after hard hikes. Never once did I console myself with a PLM, nor wish I had gone after easier caches.

 

I equate the idea of finding a PLM after a day of failures with, say, a rough day of rock climbing failures. Why would you console yourself with the "victory" of climbing a step stool?

 

Too funny! Your "purist" point of view is how I imagined most geocachers would think, but boy did I find out differently!

[Mushtang]

The main thing is to have fun. If you are doing something that is not fun, either find a way to make it fun or stop doing it.

 

When I am finding parking lot micro caches, I tend to enjoy it because of the people I am with, not always the cache itself. I do not expect the cache to entertain me, I can do that on my own.

Of course when you're finding parking lot micro caches alone you can always sabotage the cache by taking up way too much room in the log book as your way of indicating your preference for a larger cache. That's entertainment too I suppose.