ignore list

[+skyraider]

Just wondering who has the most local caches on their "Ignore List" I have about 700.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Just wondering who has the most local caches on their "Ignore List" I have about 700.

We have ZERO! But yet again, we don't have an Ignore List.

[+Whistlen]

Not sure what the deal is to have so many...I only have 2 and they are puzzles that make my head hurt real bad AND the hiders are not to friendly when it comes to hints and such. 700?? Man...WHY???

[+skyraider]

WHY? That's the point. I was just trying to get a discussion started about why cachers put caches on their ignore list. Maybe because they may be too hard to try, or maybe just because they don't like a certain cacher, or maybe 'cause they don't want to be bothered by "Park & Grabs" What is your opinion?

[+plumbrokeacres]

I wish I had 700 caches locally

[+simpjkee]

I have 11, but last week I had 0.

 

I typically would put events in my ignore list, but also "watch" them so I got email notifications, but didnt have to see them in my "closest unfound caches list".

 

In the last week I decided to open up my ignore list for business. I ignored a cache because it is hidden poorly in a bush, by a cacher who continually poorly hides caches in bushes.

 

I've ignored one by an owner who deletes valid logs at will while posting invalid notes on my cache.

 

And I've ignored 5 or 6 caches by a cacher who places ridiculously hard hides for seemingly no other reason than to rack up DNF logs.

 

Not that I don't like these 3 people. I'm sure they are all great people and I'm happy to have them as part of the geocaching community. I just have no interest in their caches.

[GOF and Bacall]

Lots of valid reasons to ignore caches. Don't see any reason to make a contest out of it though. The numbers, including the ignore list count, are meaningless because we all use the features differently.

[+hydnsek]

Just wondering who has the most local caches on their "Ignore List" I have about 700.

We have ZERO! But yet again, we don't have an Ignore List.

Ditto.

[+t4e]

i have none, i go for all caches, if its a mystery that i can't solve i actually put it on my watchlist so i can see the logs, its amazing how insightful they can be sometimes

 

may i ask what are some of the reasons of ignoring caches to get to 700, and how large an area do they cover?

[GOF and Bacall]

Perhaps the OP doesn't enjoy P&G caches and puts them on the ignore list to keep them off his PQs. Some of them may be puzzles he doesn't like messing with or just can't figure out. There could be a cacher the OP doesn't get along with whose caches go right on the list. They may even put caches on the ignore list instead of logging finds. I'm sure there are more reasons I haven't thought of.

[Mr.Yuck]

i have none, i go for all caches, if its a mystery that i can't solve i actually put it on my watchlist so i can see the logs, its amazing how insightful they can be sometimes

 

may i ask what are some of the reasons of ignoring caches to get to 700, and how large an area do they cover?

 

I personally only use it for my 50 mile cache notification radius. That would be 80.45 Kilometers in Kitchener. On very rare occasions, I'll ignore a few in an area I'm going to for a road trip, if I have studied the local caches far in advance.

 

I ain't answering this question, I was once accused of "bragging" how many caches are on my ignore list. It's quite a few, but less than 700.

[+Snoogans]

Big fat goose egg here.

 

I view the use of ignore listings as sticking your fingers in your ears and going LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA....

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Just wondering who has the most local caches on their "Ignore List" I have about 700.

We have ZERO! But yet again, we don't have an Ignore List.

Ditto.

 

Same here. I am perfectly capable of not searching for a cache if I know that it's one I don't care to find. To me, using an ignore list is like covering ones eyes so that you can pretend that something doesn't exist. I suppose using the ignore feature would be easier if you've got thousands of caches nearbym, but when there are only 3-4 new caches published within 20 miles in the past three months it's hard to reduce the number of caches available to find beyond that.

[GOF and Bacall]

Seems like a rather narrow minded pov. The ignore list is nothing but one more tool to help maximize a cachers enjoyment of the game.

[+The Weasel]

I have like 5 caches on my ignore list, only because I helped a cacher place them and he was the one who listed them and I don't plan on getting a cheap smiley on them.

[+Kit Fox]

Seems like a rather narrow minded pov. The ignore list is nothing but one more tool to help maximize a cachers enjoyment of the game.

 

Exactly!

 

I have 43 on my ignore list. None of the caches meet my "fun factor" criteria for geocaching.

[+Castle Mischief]

Can we brag about how many forum posters are on that ignore list now?

[+Team Typowiz]

Just this weekend I put all caches by two particular cache owners (married couple) on my ignore list. They intentionally post coordinates that are 20-60 feet away from ground zero in order to "widen the hunt area". While in some cases this is not a big issue, in some cases it is. They have a hide, for example, in a very dense row of tall shrubs behind a business where posted coords were about 26 feet from ground zero. In this particular location it would take hours to thoroughly investigate the shrubbery, no doubt doing significant damage in the process. After a rash of DNFs and being unable to find the container themselves, they updated coords by 13 feet to "narrow the hunt area". After another DNF (mine), they updated coords to be "right on top of the cache" (their words). They have continually deleted logs that mention their coords are off. These have to be the only caches I've ever sought where the coords provided intentionally took you AWAY from the hide. Life is too short.

[+Walts Hunting]

I have hundreds. I read the description and if isn't something I want to do i.e. micro series in a park area it goes on ignore. Puzzles generally go there with few exceptions as well as challenges I have no desire to work on. I feel it is a valuable tool so they no longer show up in my PQ's.

 

On the other hand some people's egos are wrapped up in this hobby and feel they have to find everything and fine for them.

 

As to the couple who post false coordinates that (if provable) is cause for a NA log since it clearly violates guidelines.

[+t4e]

Just this weekend I put all caches by two particular cache owners (married couple) on my ignore list. They intentionally post coordinates that are 20-60 feet away from ground zero in order to "widen the hunt area".

 

Cache Listing Requirements / Guidelines

 

Guidelines last updated August 19, 2009.

 

These are listing guidelines only. Before a cache is published on the website, a volunteer will review the page for inaccuracies, bad coordinates, and compliance with these guidelines.

 

Traditional Caches

The coordinates listed on the traditional cache page are the exact location of the cache.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

 

 

so rules clearly state that coordinates should be the exact location of the cache, they are obviously making their own rules now, what's next...."cache is in the Wal-Mart parking lot Good Luck!"

 

instead of just putting the caches on ignore you need to point out the issue to a reviewer, while they are checking for "bad coordinates" can't possibly know that they are off from GZ

[+Team Typowiz]

"cache is in the Wal-Mart parking lot Good Luck!"

That's almost exactly what I said to my other half: "They may as well just give you coords to the parking area." Thanks for this information, I sincerely appreciate it.

[knowschad]

Five.

One is an indoor multi in the Mall of America. I rarely even go there when I want to buy something.I sure don't want to go geocaching there.

Another is at a dog park waaayy out of town that charges for access even though nobody even lives nearby.

Another is a nasty micro in the deep woods, down a steep ravine filled with downed trees.

One is in some spruce trees almost up against the neighbor's kitchen window,

One has since been archived by the reviewer, so I guess I will be taking that one off.

Edited February 8, 2010 by knowschad

[+Snoogans]

Can we brag about how many forum posters are on that ignore list now?

 

Just one. Same feeling of LALALALALALALALALALA. Thankfully that person hasn't posted in years now.

[+Printess Caroline]

Just wondering who has the most local caches on their "Ignore List" I have about 700.

 

That seems like a pretty high number to me. You must have extremely high standards or live in a sea of Park and Grabs.

 

There are three reasons that the 34 caches on my ignore list are there:

 

~There are a few that just don't seem interesting to me.

 

~Most of them are kayak caches around my home that I'm unable to do until I find a boat.

 

~One is a cache that I found offensive. It is the only one on the list that the owner knows that I am ignoring their cache. That particular cache was named "COULD THIS BE THE TREE?" and suggested that it was hidden in a tree where a serial killer had tortured one of his victims. I found the whole thing sickening and told the owner so.

[+cmhall9]

I don't use the ignore list. But I do have 4 or 5 I've been ignoring. I've made several attempts to find them but no clues, hints or help = no fun.

[+power69]

if its a 99999999999999 rocks hide it goes on ignore[have lots of these on ignore]

if its a blinkie on black wrought iron canal fencing it goes on ignore[currently have 3 of those on ignore]

if its one ive been to and know i'll never find it, it goes on ignore

-

I think i have about 70 caches on ignore.

[+GeoGeeBee]

I have 11 caches on my ignore list. All of them are below ground. I understand that some people enjoy exploring the city's underground drainage system; I am not one of those people.

[+DarkZen]

Can we brag about how many forum posters are on that ignore list now?

 

Just one. Same feeling of LALALALALALALALALALA. Thankfully that person hasn't posted in years now.

And you know that how?

 

No posters or caches on ignore.

[+DragonsWest]

Only one on my list, it's placed on private property with clearly posted No Tresspassing signs.

[+BCSasquatch]

I haven't made an ignore list yet but I plan to make one soon. The main purpose is to remove caches I have no interest in from my PQs. I have over 3500 caches in a 20km radius of my home and there are some I just don't want to do.

 

Various reasons -

too difficult for my current experience level

Insane puzzle caches that require hours of deciphering or special skills / knowledge

In an area I don't want to hunt in

Or a magnetic nano stuck to a sign or something similar

 

I can see many benefits to having an ignore list - especially when you are dealing with thousands of hides in a fairly small area.

 

It is my right to cover my ears and go LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA!!! and I plan on exorcising it

[+GrateBear]

Technically, I suppose I could say there are over 980,000 on my ignore list, as there are 2900 within 50 miles of my house, and I have no need to look further for some time

 

In actuality, there are only 2. One is on the bottom of a lake and I don't scuba dive, and the other is in a pipe culvert under a road, with a fast flowing stream running through it. Low flow in the winter, but I don't have the appropriate boots to venture in and I have a strong feeling I'd end up tipping over!

[+9Key]

I plan on exorcising it

I can get you in touch with a priest that can help with that.

[+9Key]

I was surprised to find that I have 34. Almost all of them are needle in a haystack hides meant to pile up DNFs. A couple are in trashy areas and a few more are on private property.

[GOF and Bacall]

I was surprised to find that I have 34. Almost all of them are needle in a haystack hides meant to pile up DNFs. A couple are in trashy areas and a few more are on private property.

 

34? You aren't even trying, are you?

[+BCSasquatch]

I plan on exorcising it

I can get you in touch with a priest that can help with that.

 

D'oh!

[+ras_oscar]

after caching a litle over a year i opened up my ignore list last week and added 3. 2 i had searched for previously, logged DNFs and am fairly certain are missing. In each case i have logged a NM. the third is a traditional that requires the solution of a puzzle to get the correct coordinates. I generally fiter out puzzles. In that case I had first sent the CO a PM suggesting s/he adjust the cache type to a puzzle. No reply. Why ignore? I like to see the widening black hole around my home coordinates on the MS Streets map.

[+Harry Dolphin]

The main purpose is to remove caches I have no interest in from my PQs.

And that is my porpoise as well. Those I have no interest in hunting. A few cachers whose caches I have no interest in. Any cache in a cemetery. Those belonging to the cacher who asked me not to hunt his caches because I logged that the park in which one of his caches was hiding was 'boring'. (Not a great loss...)

Certainly enough other caches out there to hunt. The ones I have no interest in hunting no longer show up, so they aren't there!

But, I do keep the kayaking caches (in case I ever do borrow a kayak, or I gain enough confidence to walk across the ice in the winter.) And the mystery caches (I might solve them sometime!) And even the tree climbing caches (not sure why. Guess they're just not worth ignoring.)

So, yeah, there are a couple hundred caches on my ignore list.

[+Mudfrog]

Perhaps the OP doesn't enjoy P&G caches and puts them on the ignore list to keep them off his PQs. Some of them may be puzzles he doesn't like messing with or just can't figure out. There could be a cacher the OP doesn't get along with whose caches go right on the list. They may even put caches on the ignore list instead of logging finds. I'm sure there are more reasons I haven't thought of.

 

I have a few on my ignore list but not for any of the reasons mentioned above. These caches are only there because i helped hide them and don't want to see them every time i bring up my unfound cache list....

[+Castle Mischief]

Aw, what the heck. 51 caches on the ignore list. For one reason or another I don't want these showing up in my PQs. I'm 99% sure that I will never desire to hunt them or will never own the equipment required to find them.

 

...and fluctuating number of forum posters.

[+skyraider]

Thanks for eveyone that expressed their opinion on this. I just don't care to do "park&grabs" or any caches that state I have to "watch out for muggles". That is just the way I like to cache. I like to the harder terrain ones.

 

That is what is so great about our sport/hobby. Everyone can do what they like and there is no right or wrong. I don't have anything against what others choose to do, but was just wondering how other cachers handled their Ignore List. Thanks for the input.

[+kywaterfowler]

I currently don't have one but I am going to start one because I have several around me that are ones you have to have a kayak or boat to get to them and I don't have either a kayak or a boat.

[+Castle Mischief]

I currently don't have one but I am going to start one because I have several around me that are ones you have to have a kayak or boat to get to them and I don't have either a kayak or a boat.

 

That's me. It's easier for me to drop it in the ignore box than to remember to filter it out of my PQ.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Seems like a rather narrow minded pov. The ignore list is nothing but one more tool to help maximize a cachers enjoyment of the game.

 

Exactly!

 

I have 43 on my ignore list. None of the caches meet my "fun factor" criteria for geocaching.

 

Maybe I should try to explain my point better, though I don't know if it will make a difference regarding a perception of my narrow-mindedness.

 

From a reading of other responses here it looks like a lot of the caches then end up on ignore list are caches that are basically just a type that one doesn't care to find, for example micros in parking lots. Maybe it's because the local cache density is fairly sparse but can't you ignore caches without putting it on a list. In a couple of posts there were some specific caches that were memorable enough that they could be described in detail in this thread. If they're memorable, can't they just be ignored with having them go on a list. It's almost as if putting a cache on an ignore list is a punishment of a CO for placing a cache of a type one doesn't like. It's like the old usenet equivalent of a killfile, where it wasn't enough to create a killfile so filter out posts from certain people, but many seem to feel that it was also important to announce publicly that they are ignoring that poster.

 

Others have said that they'll put difficult puzzle caches on ignore list and I've even seen someone write that they've found all of the local caches except those on their ignore list. That's liking saying I can pass the bar exam as long as I can ignore any questions for which I don't know the correct answer.

 

For the persons that wrote:

 

"On the other hand some people's egos are wrapped up in this hobby and feel they have to find everything and fine for them."

 

It's not about finding everything. When you live in an area with nearly 3000 caches hidden within 20 miles, how you play the games is likely going to be significantly different then if you live in an area where there only 20 or so caches that you haven't found within 20 miles.

[+Castle Mischief]

Seems like a rather narrow minded pov. The ignore list is nothing but one more tool to help maximize a cachers enjoyment of the game.

 

Exactly!

 

I have 43 on my ignore list. None of the caches meet my "fun factor" criteria for geocaching.

 

Maybe I should try to explain my point better, though I don't know if it will make a difference regarding a perception of my narrow-mindedness.

 

From a reading of other responses here it looks like a lot of the caches then end up on ignore list are caches that are basically just a type that one doesn't care to find, for example micros in parking lots. Maybe it's because the local cache density is fairly sparse but can't you ignore caches without putting it on a list. In a couple of posts there were some specific caches that were memorable enough that they could be described in detail in this thread. If they're memorable, can't they just be ignored with having them go on a list. It's almost as if putting a cache on an ignore list is a punishment of a CO for placing a cache of a type one doesn't like. It's like the old usenet equivalent of a killfile, where it wasn't enough to create a killfile so filter out posts from certain people, but many seem to feel that it was also important to announce publicly that they are ignoring that poster.

 

Others have said that they'll put difficult puzzle caches on ignore list and I've even seen someone write that they've found all of the local caches except those on their ignore list. That's liking saying I can pass the bar exam as long as I can ignore any questions for which I don't know the correct answer.

 

For the persons that wrote:

 

"On the other hand some people's egos are wrapped up in this hobby and feel they have to find everything and fine for them."

 

It's not about finding everything. When you live in an area with nearly 3000 caches hidden within 20 miles, how you play the games is likely going to be significantly different then if you live in an area where there only 20 or so caches that you haven't found within 20 miles.

 

I'm just trying to get the most bang for the buck out of my PQ results. If I am 99% certain that a particular cache isn't what I'm going to be into, then I'd rather see it fall off the radar so that another cache more my liking will pop up in my GPSr.

 

I could just "manually" ignore it, but I like having that potential other cache that is more to my taste out there on the fringes of my PQ range.

 

Same for the caches that I don't have a boat/climbing equipment/free ride to the ISS for.

 

It's not that I necessarily have a low opinion of the ignored caches or their owners, I just would rather my attention be drawn towards other caches.

 

Now anouncing which of those specific caches are, or which cachers I have on my forum ignore list... that would be tacky, pointless, passive-agressive, and just so... 1998.

[+Printess Caroline]

 

From a reading of other responses here it looks like a lot of the caches then end up on ignore list are caches that are basically just a type that one doesn't care to find, for example micros in parking lots. Maybe it's because the local cache density is fairly sparse but can't you ignore caches without putting it on a list. In a couple of posts there were some specific caches that were memorable enough that they could be described in detail in this thread. If they're memorable, can't they just be ignored with having them go on a list. It's almost as if putting a cache on an ignore list is a punishment of a CO for placing a cache of a type one doesn't like. It's like the old usenet equivalent of a killfile, where it wasn't enough to create a killfile so filter out posts from certain people, but many seem to feel that it was also important to announce publicly that they are ignoring that poster.

 

Others have said that they'll put difficult puzzle caches on ignore list and I've even seen someone write that they've found all of the local caches except those on their ignore list. That's liking saying I can pass the bar exam as long as I can ignore any questions for which I don't know the correct answer.

 

 

I don't really see the difference between just ignoring a cache and putting the caches on an ignore list except that it is easier for me to put them on that list. It is not a punishment of the CO unless you tell them that you are ignoring their cache. That is news that no CO wants to know and will not know unless you tell. Because that is information that is potentially hurtful, I generally do not tell others the specific caches on my ignore list. Only once have I informed a cache owner that their cache was going on my ignore list. That cache was one that I found offensive, and I wanted to state my dislike for what they had done. They did alter their listing so that it wasn't so blatantly offensive after I wrote them, which I appreciate, but the cache remains on my ignore list. It is a place I just do not want to go.

[+larryc43230]

From a reading of other responses here it looks like a lot of the caches then end up on ignore list are caches that are basically just a type that one doesn't care to find, for example micros in parking lots. Maybe it's because the local cache density is fairly sparse but can't you ignore caches without putting it on a list.

It might indeed have something to do with cache density. I have more than 400 caches on my Ignore List, for a bunch of different reasons; that leaves me with more than 750 caches within my "comfort range" of 60 miles that I want to find. Those, and the new caches that pop up just about every day, should keep me happy for a long time to come.

It's almost as if putting a cache on an ignore list is a punishment of a CO for placing a cache of a type one doesn't like.

I don't understand this criticism at all. How is anyone supposed to find out which caches are on my Ignore List? It's not public. I do have one cache owner whose cache hides are systematically placed on my Ignore List, due to some serious personal differences. That cache owner has no way of knowing (and doesn't know) that I'm ignoring their caches, and I'm not about to tell them. Placing their caches on my Ignore List is not the same as "punishing" the cache owner.

 

There are several types of caches that automatically go on my Ignore List, including urban micros that require extreme stealth (that's simply not my idea of a good time); caches that require serious tree-climbing (there are a lot of them in my area, and I'm just not good at that sort of thing anymore); and caches that require a boat to get to. Why should I be expected to wade through caches that I know I wouldn't enjoy, or which I'm not capable of going after, when I'm out caching? I place them on my Ignore List simply so I can concentrate on the caches I would like to find.

 

--Larry

[GOF and Bacall]

Seems like a rather narrow minded pov. The ignore list is nothing but one more tool to help maximize a cachers enjoyment of the game.

 

Exactly!

 

I have 43 on my ignore list. None of the caches meet my "fun factor" criteria for geocaching.

 

Maybe I should try to explain my point better, though I don't know if it will make a difference regarding a perception of my narrow-mindedness.

 

From a reading of other responses here it looks like a lot of the caches then end up on ignore list are caches that are basically just a type that one doesn't care to find, for example micros in parking lots. Maybe it's because the local cache density is fairly sparse but can't you ignore caches without putting it on a list. In a couple of posts there were some specific caches that were memorable enough that they could be described in detail in this thread. If they're memorable, can't they just be ignored with having them go on a list. It's almost as if putting a cache on an ignore list is a punishment of a CO for placing a cache of a type one doesn't like. It's like the old usenet equivalent of a killfile, where it wasn't enough to create a killfile so filter out posts from certain people, but many seem to feel that it was also important to announce publicly that they are ignoring that poster.

 

Others have said that they'll put difficult puzzle caches on ignore list and I've even seen someone write that they've found all of the local caches except those on their ignore list. That's liking saying I can pass the bar exam as long as I can ignore any questions for which I don't know the correct answer.

 

For the persons that wrote:

 

"On the other hand some people's egos are wrapped up in this hobby and feel they have to find everything and fine for them."

 

It's not about finding everything. When you live in an area with nearly 3000 caches hidden within 20 miles, how you play the games is likely going to be significantly different then if you live in an area where there only 20 or so caches that you haven't found within 20 miles.

 

I think I see our disconnect here. You are mistaking my motives, and those of many other like minded cachers, for using the ignore list. There is no malice. The ignore list is a private, "my eyes only", bookmark. It is merely a tool I use to help me sort the caches I choose to hunt. Just like the PQ is a tool. I use both together.It really is not about the caches on the list but rather those that are NOT on the list.

 

Not one co has ever been notified that they own a cache on my ignore list. That would be unnecessarily cruel.

Edited February 11, 2010 by GOF & Bacall

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Seems like a rather narrow minded pov. The ignore list is nothing but one more tool to help maximize a cachers enjoyment of the game.

 

Exactly!

 

I have 43 on my ignore list. None of the caches meet my "fun factor" criteria for geocaching.

 

Maybe I should try to explain my point better, though I don't know if it will make a difference regarding a perception of my narrow-mindedness.

 

From a reading of other responses here it looks like a lot of the caches then end up on ignore list are caches that are basically just a type that one doesn't care to find, for example micros in parking lots. Maybe it's because the local cache density is fairly sparse but can't you ignore caches without putting it on a list. In a couple of posts there were some specific caches that were memorable enough that they could be described in detail in this thread. If they're memorable, can't they just be ignored with having them go on a list. It's almost as if putting a cache on an ignore list is a punishment of a CO for placing a cache of a type one doesn't like. It's like the old usenet equivalent of a killfile, where it wasn't enough to create a killfile so filter out posts from certain people, but many seem to feel that it was also important to announce publicly that they are ignoring that poster.

 

Others have said that they'll put difficult puzzle caches on ignore list and I've even seen someone write that they've found all of the local caches except those on their ignore list. That's liking saying I can pass the bar exam as long as I can ignore any questions for which I don't know the correct answer.

 

For the persons that wrote:

 

"On the other hand some people's egos are wrapped up in this hobby and feel they have to find everything and fine for them."

 

It's not about finding everything. When you live in an area with nearly 3000 caches hidden within 20 miles, how you play the games is likely going to be significantly different then if you live in an area where there only 20 or so caches that you haven't found within 20 miles.

 

I'm just trying to get the most bang for the buck out of my PQ results. If I am 99% certain that a particular cache isn't what I'm going to be into, then I'd rather see it fall off the radar so that another cache more my liking will pop up in my GPSr.

 

I could just "manually" ignore it, but I like having that potential other cache that is more to my taste out there on the fringes of my PQ range.

 

Same for the caches that I don't have a boat/climbing equipment/free ride to the ISS for.

 

I do understand that there are likely a group of caches (such as boat accessible only) that one might want to exclude, especially if you have a lot of cache of that type. There are, however, several specific caches mentioned in this thread that seem to be singled out (i.e one at a certain mall). Maybe this is most a cache density issue but there just aren't that many caches around me that I can't keep track in my head that it's one that I'm not going to bother searching for.

 

 

It's not that I necessarily have a low opinion of the ignored caches or their owners, I just would rather my attention be drawn towards other caches.

 

Now anouncing which of those specific caches are, or which cachers I have on my forum ignore list... that would be tacky, pointless, passive-agressive, and just so... 1998.

 

So what's the point of this thread? While nobody has specifically named a cache owner, there are a number of responses where with ignore lists with some really high numbers, almost as if it's a contest to see who can ignore the most caches.

 

As long as you're mentioning passive-aggressive behaviors, one of the other issues I have with ignore lists is that it a means of passively dealing with that caches that may be potentially detrimental to the game. Someone mentioned placing a cache on their ignore list because it was on private property. For ever one that places that cache on an ignore list there are probably many more that will just go ahead and find it. Unless someone explicitly tells the CO that they're ignoring the cache, and why they're ignoring the cache, all the CO is going to see is the finds, and eventually it may lead to property owner vs. geocaching issues.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

From a reading of other responses here it looks like a lot of the caches then end up on ignore list are caches that are basically just a type that one doesn't care to find, for example micros in parking lots. Maybe it's because the local cache density is fairly sparse but can't you ignore caches without putting it on a list.

It might indeed have something to do with cache density. I have more than 400 caches on my Ignore List, for a bunch of different reasons; that leaves me with more than 750 caches within my "comfort range" of 60 miles that I want to find. Those, and the new caches that pop up just about every day, should keep me happy for a long time to come.

 

 

To put that into perspective, while you have new caches popping up about every day, I can count the number of new caches that have been placed in the last three months that are within 20 miles of where I live on one hand.

 

All of these threads about "how many caches are on your ignore list", "how many FTFs do you have", "How many caches have you found in a day" are pointless without a consideration of cache density. The last time I checked there were 27 countries in the world that have zero caches, while some areas in the U.S. have over 10,000 caches within a 10 mile radius.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Seems like a rather narrow minded pov. The ignore list is nothing but one more tool to help maximize a cachers enjoyment of the game.

 

Exactly!

 

I have 43 on my ignore list. None of the caches meet my "fun factor" criteria for geocaching.

 

Maybe I should try to explain my point better, though I don't know if it will make a difference regarding a perception of my narrow-mindedness.

 

From a reading of other responses here it looks like a lot of the caches then end up on ignore list are caches that are basically just a type that one doesn't care to find, for example micros in parking lots. Maybe it's because the local cache density is fairly sparse but can't you ignore caches without putting it on a list. In a couple of posts there were some specific caches that were memorable enough that they could be described in detail in this thread. If they're memorable, can't they just be ignored with having them go on a list. It's almost as if putting a cache on an ignore list is a punishment of a CO for placing a cache of a type one doesn't like. It's like the old usenet equivalent of a killfile, where it wasn't enough to create a killfile so filter out posts from certain people, but many seem to feel that it was also important to announce publicly that they are ignoring that poster.

 

Others have said that they'll put difficult puzzle caches on ignore list and I've even seen someone write that they've found all of the local caches except those on their ignore list. That's liking saying I can pass the bar exam as long as I can ignore any questions for which I don't know the correct answer.

 

For the persons that wrote:

 

"On the other hand some people's egos are wrapped up in this hobby and feel they have to find everything and fine for them."

 

It's not about finding everything. When you live in an area with nearly 3000 caches hidden within 20 miles, how you play the games is likely going to be significantly different then if you live in an area where there only 20 or so caches that you haven't found within 20 miles.

 

I think I see our disconnect here. You are mistaking my motives, and those of many other like minded cachers, for using the ignore list. There is no malice. The ignore list is a private, "my eyes only", bookmark. It is merely a tool I use to help me sort the caches I choose to hunt. Just like the PQ is a tool. I use both together.It really is not about the caches on the list but rather those that are NOT on the list.

 

Not one co has ever been notified that they own a cache on my ignore list. That would be unnecessarily cruel.

 

And referring to those that choose *not* to use an ignore list as narrow minded and egotistical isn't?