Boy, has geocaching changed! Microcaches everywhere!

[+BAMBOOZLE]

I have hidden my fair share of Nano's and Micros. I usually avoid a Micro in the woods since there are so many large hiding spots. Micros are as fun as large and regular caches.

 

What I fail to comprehend is when the cacher is negative, complaining and whining about another lamp pole micro yet they still went to find it. A simple solution is DON'T SEARCH FOR LAMP POLE CACHES. Like the Cache-aholic this person has no self control. They think they will die if they don't search for that lamp pole cache and then cry the blues and lament about the state of Geocaching. Just stop complaining and put a nice little TFTC and move on to your ivory caching tower.

 

Can you tell I have issues?

 

/rant

 

Again, like so many who post negative comments, the OP HAS NEVER HID A CACHE

I just read in our local forum that these folks are said to be on " GEOWELFARE "

[+L0ne.R]

My first hide is a micro because I am just learning and wanted to draw attention to the place I put it.

 

It does seem that many newbies feel micros are what you cut-your-teeth on, what you test-the-waters with. It seems that newbies who start off with micros are saying....I'm not going to invest much in the beginning until I see if I like this game and like being a CO.

[+L0ne.R]

Yesterday we walked about 5 miles on a trail in the swamp in 90+ deg heat......there were about 14 caches on the trail and about 2/3 were great, clever, micros.

 

Can you describe what was clever and great about those micros you found.

I think most people can appreciate clever and creative micros, maybe we need more examples of what that is. I wish there was a way to filter for clever/creative/funny/wow micros.

[CoyoteRed]

Anyone else care to share their findings?

Kind of tough considering I filter out all micros outside my potential hiding range.

[+e-bird67]

I have hidden my fair share of Nano's and Micros. I usually avoid a Micro in the woods since there are so many large hiding spots. Micros are as fun as large and regular caches.

 

What I fail to comprehend is when the cacher is negative, complaining and whining about another lamp pole micro yet they still went to find it. A simple solution is DON'T SEARCH FOR LAMP POLE CACHES. Like the Cache-aholic this person has no self control. They think they will die if they don't search for that lamp pole cache and then cry the blues and lament about the state of Geocaching. Just stop complaining and put a nice little TFTC and move on to your ivory caching tower.

 

Can you tell I have issues?

 

/rant

 

Again, like so many who post negative comments, the OP HAS NEVER HID A CACHE

I just read in our local forum that these folks are said to be on " GEOWELFARE "

 

OP here. First of all, I doubt anyone would want someone who has just re-entered the sport after many years of inactivity and who barely has 16 recent finds to run off and place a cache. I would like to have quite a few more under my belt before I start placing them, thank you very much. There's both and art and a science to it, and I've already seen threads where experienced cachers express a preference for cachers to gain a significant amount of experience before they start placing caches all over the place. In good time, my friend...

 

Second, I wasn't complaining as much as trying to get information about why the sport has changed so much since the early 2000's. Frankly, several people made some good points about microcaches that I hadn't considered. In fact, I hadn't considered the "addiction factor", which might make me start looking for whatever I can find if I happen to be in a new part of town and have an hour to kill. So, points well taken. I had equated geocaching to something I did while taking a hike, and the sport has just grown to the point that there are caches all over the place, with some locations being better suited for micros. No harm done, and certainly no need to be snippy about it.

 

The irony of all this is that there is a nano cache at my workplace that needs adopting, and since my office is practically within spitting distance of the hiding place, I might agree to take it over.

 

Anyway, it's all good. Caches for everyone, right?

[+sbell111]

OP here. First of all, I doubt anyone would want someone who has just re-entered the sport after many years of inactivity and who barely has 16 recent finds to run off and place a cache. I would like to have quite a few more under my belt before I start placing them, thank you very much. There's both and art and a science to it, and I've already seen threads where experienced cachers express a preference for cachers to gain a significant amount of experience before they start placing caches all over the place. In good time, my friend...

Actually, it's mostly fairly new players who want to impose some sort of find requirement. It's the experienced people who jump into the thread and explain why that's a lousy idea.

[+Castle Mischief]

OP here. First of all, I doubt anyone would want someone who has just re-entered the sport after many years of inactivity and who barely has 16 recent finds to run off and place a cache. I would like to have quite a few more under my belt before I start placing them, thank you very much. There's both and art and a science to it, and I've already seen threads where experienced cachers express a preference for cachers to gain a significant amount of experience before they start placing caches all over the place. In good time, my friend...

Actually, it's mostly fairly new players who want to impose some sort of find requirement. It's the experienced people who jump into the thread and explain why that's a lousy idea.

 

Digging up a post from May to correct somebody...? Nice.

[+briansnat]

Must be a slow day at work.

[+sbell111]

OP here. First of all, I doubt anyone would want someone who has just re-entered the sport after many years of inactivity and who barely has 16 recent finds to run off and place a cache. I would like to have quite a few more under my belt before I start placing them, thank you very much. There's both and art and a science to it, and I've already seen threads where experienced cachers express a preference for cachers to gain a significant amount of experience before they start placing caches all over the place. In good time, my friend...

Actually, it's mostly fairly new players who want to impose some sort of find requirement. It's the experienced people who jump into the thread and explain why that's a lousy idea.

 

Digging up a post from May to correct somebody...? Nice.

Oops. I got my threads confused. Mea culpa.

 

I'm over it. Perhaps you should get over it.

[+sbell111]

Must be a slow day at work.

On a slow day, I would never have made the error.

[+Castle Mischief]

Oops. I got my threads confused. Mea culpa.

 

I'm over it. Perhaps you should get over it.

 

You've got me at a distinct disadvantage here... I was never any good at this in 2nd grade. I think the correct response is "I know you are, but what am I?" but I could be way off base.

[GOF and Bacall]

Oops. I got my threads confused. Mea culpa.

 

I'm over it. Perhaps you should get over it.

 

You've got me at a distinct disadvantage here... I was never any good at this in 2nd grade. I think the correct response is "I know you are, but what am I?" but I could be way off base.

I'll be the kid in the back going "OOoo!" Who is gonna be the good two-shoes that tells the teacher? It should be a girl, you know how they are.

[+gpsblake]

Like it or not, the urban micro has lead to a boom in geocaching.

 

It makes it so easy now to drive up to the cache, walk 20 feet, and sign then have to drive 20 miles in the woods, walk a mile to the cache, have to deal with a bouncing GPS, and sign a log.

 

Seriously, I've been looking at a couple of geocaches placed recently in Newberry. One is deep on the woods, the others are urban micros. The one deep in the woods at Lynches Woods, has been found once. The micros have been found several dozen times.

 

If Groundspeak did ban urban micros, geocache finds would go down 95 percent.

Edited September 27, 2010 by gpsblake