Micros the scurge of geocaching and maybe the end?

[+narcissa]

At least this thread about micros has a hilarious title.

[+Boxcars]

I know I'm new, but it seems obvious to me that maintaining micros is far less work, especially when you live far from them; therefore more get placed. Also we could encourage owners to maintain larger caches by "maintaining " or heaven forbid "UPGRADING" the swag we come across.

[+Boxcars]

I know I'm new, but it seems obvious to me that maintaining micros is far less work, especially when you live far from them; therefore more get placed. Also we could encourage owners to maintain larger caches by "maintaining " or heaven forbid "UPGRADING" the swag we come across.

[knowschad]

I know I'm new, but it seems obvious to me that maintaining micros is far less work, especially when you live far from them; therefore more get placed. Also we could encourage owners to maintain larger caches by "maintaining " or heaven forbid "UPGRADING" the swag we come across.

Actually, I think that most would agree that the opposite is true. Micros are generally higher maintenance. The logs tend to fill up much faster, and depending on the container used, they are more likely to get wet.

 

In addition, if a cache is placed far enough from home that maintenance is an issue, then it was placed too far from home, regardless of size.

 

Swag is generally not considered a part of the cache owner's maintenance responsibilities. There was a pretty good thread about this not too long ago. Your statement about cachers helping to keep the swag quality up is right-on.

[+sbell111]

I agree with the dog. My experience is that micros tend to require much more maintenance than larger caches, 'largely' because we place micros in locations that are much less private.

[+Castle Mischief]

I agree with the dog. My experience is that micros tend to require much more maintenance than larger caches, 'largely' because we place micros in locations that are much less private.

 

I tend to have gasket issues with micros more frequently than ammo cans, so yeah this has proven to be true for me as well.

[+L0ne.R]

I know I'm new, but it seems obvious to me that maintaining micros is far less work, especially when you live far from them; therefore more get placed. Also we could encourage owners to maintain larger caches by "maintaining " or heaven forbid "UPGRADING" the swag we come across.

Actually, I think that most would agree that the opposite is true. Micros are generally higher maintenance. The logs tend to fill up much faster, and depending on the container used, they are more likely to get wet.

 

In addition, if a cache is placed far enough from home that maintenance is an issue, then it was placed too far from home, regardless of size.

 

Swag is generally not considered a part of the cache owner's maintenance responsibilities. There was a pretty good thread about this not too long ago. Your statement about cachers helping to keep the swag quality up is right-on.

 

I agree that micros are probably not placed because they are easier to maintain. I have read in the forums that some people switch to micro hides after placing regular size caches and having them muggled. They have said that they didn't want to spend the money on a bigger cache only to have it muggled. Micros usually cost less then $2 (more often free) to hide.

[Clan Riffster]

In talking to various cache hiders who focus mostly on micros, there seem to be many reasons for their container selection:

 

1 ) They like micros.

2 ) They are cheap and easy to acquire.

3 ) They take little effort to place.

4 ) They take little effort to maintain.

5 ) They allow for more diverse placement.

6 ) Micros are more challenging.

7 ) ______________________ (Insert any number of other reasons here)

 

I think we do the caching community an injustice when we assume there must only be one reason that Cacher A chooses containers from the smaller end of the spectrum. While it's been my personal experience that cachers who saturate an area with gobs of micro hides usually fall under reasons 1, 2 & 3, that is not always the case. A while back, Kit Fox suggested that Groundspeak allow premium members to ignore particular hiders in their PQs. I think that's a great idea, as it would allow me to avoid the saturation hiders, while still allowing the rest of the micros through. The saturation hiders are the ones who usually hide the types of caches that I dislike the most, carpet bombing a region with low quality containers under the guise that quantity trumps quality.

Edited August 13, 2010 by Clan Riffster

[+2skidivers]

We have been caching for 6 years. It used to be fun to find a cache and see what there was to trade. The only reward for finding a micro is one more find. It's gotten to be all about the numbers. And we are giving up the game because of it.

[Clan Riffster]

And we are giving up the game because of it.

Sorry to see you go, Brother. If micro spew is all that's driving you away, there's an easy way to never see another one.

[knowschad]

We have been caching for 6 years. It used to be fun to find a cache and see what there was to trade. The only reward for finding a micro is one more find. It's gotten to be all about the numbers. And we are giving up the game because of it.

It is only about the numbers if it is only about the numbers to you. Don't compare yourself to others, and only go after those hides that look like the kind you enjoy, and it will be just like the old days. If that doesn't work for you, then you are simply giving up because it is time for you to give up, and nothing we can say will change that.

[+roziecakes]

We have been caching for 6 years. It used to be fun to find a cache and see what there was to trade. The only reward for finding a micro is one more find. It's gotten to be all about the numbers. And we are giving up the game because of it.

 

Maybe look outside the container and try to enjoy the place you are taken. I always find something nice to appreciate, even if it's a parking lot, but I'm a glass is half full kind of person.

[+sbell111]

We have been caching for 6 years. It used to be fun to find a cache and see what there was to trade. The only reward for finding a micro is one more find. It's gotten to be all about the numbers. And we are giving up the game because of it.

Have you considered the simple solution of only searching for caches that are not micros?

 

(It should be noted that six years ago, when you first started playing this silly game, we were debating in micro-related threads exactly like this one.)

Edited September 1, 2010 by sbell111

[Trader Rick & Rosie]

Nanos are the scurge of geocaching and may be the end...

[Mr.Yuck]

We have been caching for 6 years. It used to be fun to find a cache and see what there was to trade. The only reward for finding a micro is one more find. It's gotten to be all about the numbers. And we are giving up the game because of it.

Have you considered the simple solution of only searching for caches that are not micros?

 

(It should be noted that six years ago, when you first started playing this silly game, we were debating in micro-related threads exactly like this one.)

 

Just barely. I actually checked that out once, and I believe the oldest "lame micro" thread I could find was started by Questmaster in late 2003. And was like 98.7% against him. Lame virtuals, much earlier. Perhaps I will look for that thread again.

 

In the case of 2cachedivers, I would actually recommend the highly simple solution of just filtering out all micros. But I see they are not premium members. Have you been one in the past?

 

EDIT: He-he. Couldn't help myself. I'm not saying it's the very first one, but it's possible it is. Great reading no matter what. "The Rise of the lame micro" thread started 20 Nov. 2003 by the legendary Quest Master

Edited September 1, 2010 by Mr.Yuck

[+L0ne.R]

EDIT: He-he. Couldn't help myself. I'm not saying it's the very first one, but it's possible it is. Great reading no matter what. "The Rise of the lame micro" thread started 20 Nov. 2003 by the legendary Quest Master

 

Wow. Times haven't changed have they? Those same words apply 7 years later, only more so.

[+sbell111]

We have been caching for 6 years. It used to be fun to find a cache and see what there was to trade. The only reward for finding a micro is one more find. It's gotten to be all about the numbers. And we are giving up the game because of it.

Have you considered the simple solution of only searching for caches that are not micros?

 

(It should be noted that six years ago, when you first started playing this silly game, we were debating in micro-related threads exactly like this one.)

 

Just barely. I actually checked that out once, and I believe the oldest "lame micro" thread I could find was started by Questmaster in late 2003. And was like 98.7% against him. Lame virtuals, much earlier. Perhaps I will look for that thread again.

 

In the case of 2cachedivers, I would actually recommend the highly simple solution of just filtering out all micros. But I see they are not premium members. Have you been one in the past?

 

EDIT: He-he. Couldn't help myself. I'm not saying it's the very first one, but it's possible it is. Great reading no matter what. "The Rise of the lame micro" thread started 20 Nov. 2003 by the legendary Quest Master

That was definitely not the earliest. I'm pretty sure that there were similar topics in the old forums.

[+BajaBekka]

Mmmm, tastes like hampster.

 

 

OK EWWW!! I could have gone all day without seeing that!!

 

My goal each hide is to find a BETTER place and hide the cache BETTER, more challenging, etc. With each hide I am finding that hiding does take practice so I would hope that everyone would cut a noob some slack on their first few hides.

 

I plan on rehabbing my first few eventually and making them much better.

 

I see nothing wrong with a well hidden micro but I wouldn't specifically go on a day of caching to find just micros.

 

There be my 2 cents.

[+supertbone]

Micros are not the end of geocaching. They are a piece of it. Just because you don't like them, doesn't mean that they are bad and that others don't like them. The site has plenty of features, based on cache attributes, where you can filter out this type of cache.

[fruit of the nile]

I agree with SuperTBone

 

I don't get why everyone is saying that micros and nanos are terrible, they're my favorites! THEY are not the end geocaching, people who insist that they are should stop complaining.

[Clan Riffster]

I don't get why everyone is saying that micros and nanos are terrible

Because 98.2% of them are crappy containers, at uninspired locations, using thoughtless hide techniques and zero creativity cache pages?

Essentially hidden for no other reason than to give yet another smiley to some one who is too lazy to walk 15' from their car?

(Note: When you don't know the real statistics, making up your own, on the spot, is a time honored Internet tradition)

[+L0ne.R]

I don't get why everyone is saying that micros and nanos are terrible

Because 98.2% of them are crappy containers, at uninspired locations, using thoughtless hide techniques and zero creativity cache pages?

Essentially hidden for no other reason than to give yet another smiley to some one who is too lazy to walk 15' from their car?

(Note: When you don't know the real statistics, making up your own, on the spot, is a time honored Internet tradition)

 

They then take up a .1 mile radius of an area preventing another CO from hiding a better cache that's more then just a "numbers" experience.

[+t4e]

 

Because 98.2% of them are crappy containers, at uninspired locations, using thoughtless hide techniques and zero creativity cache pages?

Essentially hidden for no other reason than to give yet another smiley to some one who is too lazy to walk 15' from their car?

(Note: When you don't know the real statistics, making up your own, on the spot, is a time honored Internet tradition)

 

fine to make your own statistic, but no so fine grossly exaggerating

 

we found plenty of micros in great places, where anything bigger than a micro would not have been possible for various reasons

we also found plenty of ingenious micro hides

 

its easy to avoid the uninspired and thoughtless hide techniques ones

 

and personally i favor micros to any larger size cache, mainly because i don't particularly care for any swag, and because micros can be hidden in places where anything bigger would not be possible, and most times they are more challenging to find than a regular size container under the regular size pile of twigs

[Mr.Yuck]

 

Because 98.2% of them are crappy containers, at uninspired locations, using thoughtless hide techniques and zero creativity cache pages?

Essentially hidden for no other reason than to give yet another smiley to some one who is too lazy to walk 15' from their car?

(Note: When you don't know the real statistics, making up your own, on the spot, is a time honored Internet tradition)

 

fine to make your own statistic, but no so fine grossly exaggerating

 

we found plenty of micros in great places, where anything bigger than a micro would not have been possible for various reasons

we also found plenty of ingenious micro hides

 

its easy to avoid the uninspired and thoughtless hide techniques ones

 

and personally i favor micros to any larger size cache, mainly because i don't particularly care for any swag, and because micros can be hidden in places where anything bigger would not be possible, and most times they are more challenging to find than a regular size container under the regular size pile of twigs

 

May I suggest a Garmin 60 Series, manufactured in 2004, and purchased in 2005, if you don't want to walk right up to a container in the woods under an obvious pile of sticks.

 

"Grossly exaggerating" depends on your general location. There are places where 98.2% of micros are actually thoughtless, uninspired, and placed for the numbers, with 10 word cache descriptions, two of which are usually "quick grab". Myself and you just don't happen to live in one of those locations.

[+sbell111]

"Grossly exaggerating" depends on your general location. There are places where 98.2% of micros are actually thoughtless, uninspired, and placed for the numbers, with 10 word cache descriptions, two of which are usually "quick grab". Myself and you just don't happen to live in one of those locations.

Neither does anyone else.

[+Castle Mischief]

"Grossly exaggerating" depends on your general location. There are places where 98.2% of micros are actually thoughtless, uninspired, and placed for the numbers, with 10 word cache descriptions, two of which are usually "quick grab". Myself and you just don't happen to live in one of those locations.

Neither does anyone else.

 

I don't know... The term "place" is undefined and could range anywhere from a state, (ranging in size from Rhode Island to Alaska) a single parking lot, or a stretch of interstate. If one narrowed down enough of the parameters to define the term "place" with a certain goal I think you could find a "place" that was 98.2% park and grab micros.

 

So...

 

 

 

 

ADVENTURE, HO!

[Clan Riffster]

its easy to avoid the uninspired and thoughtless hide techniques ones

Well then, please regale us with your wisdom. Assume for argument's sake that I want to find only micros in great places, or ingenious micro hides, (the aforementioned 0.08%), without having to sort through the mountain of uninspired, lazy micro hides. I've found a method which does work, (mostly), but it is certainly not "easy". As an admirer of labor saving ingenuity, I'd be tickled pink to learn of your "easy" method for avoiding the uninspired and thoughtless micro hides, while still having immediate access to the micros in great places, and/or the micros utilizing ingenious hide techniques.

 

Remember, the key word in your claim is "easy"...

 

I'll wait...

[Mr.Yuck]

"Grossly exaggerating" depends on your general location. There are places where 98.2% of micros are actually thoughtless, uninspired, and placed for the numbers, with 10 word cache descriptions, two of which are usually "quick grab". Myself and you just don't happen to live in one of those locations.

Neither does anyone else.

 

Well, I don't want to call anyone, any cache, or any where out, but here ya' go.

[+scaramedic]

The micropocalypse?

 

Does this correspond with 2012. Will the number of micros suddenly cause them all to collapse in on themselves and create a singularity? Will we all be killed in a vortex of spinning light poles and guard rails? Flaming film canisters lighting the world on fire. Truly to horrible to contemplate.

 

Sorry. I know I am too new here to be such a smart aleck. I just couldn't pass it up.

 

In my limited experience I find some of them to be very tricky to find. Some, not so much.

Edited September 3, 2010 by scaramedic

[+fizzymagic]

its easy to avoid the uninspired and thoughtless hide techniques ones

Well then, please regale us with your wisdom. Assume for argument's sake that I want to find only micros in great places, or ingenious micro hides, (the aforementioned 0.08%), without having to sort through the mountain of uninspired, lazy micro hides. I've found a method which does work, (mostly), but it is certainly not "easy". As an admirer of labor saving ingenuity, I'd be tickled pink to learn of your "easy" method for avoiding the uninspired and thoughtless micro hides, while still having immediate access to the micros in great places, and/or the micros utilizing ingenious hide techniques.

 

Remember, the key word in your claim is "easy"...

 

I'll wait...

Sign me up for this one, too. I am waiting as well. I've spent a lot of time trying to come up with ways to do this, and now I hear it's "easy."

[Clan Riffster]

Sign me up for this one, too. I am waiting as well.

Two hours and counting...

[Pepper and more]

Interesting. Why does Tink say that? I generally dislike micros (even if I do happen to find one - not often) cuz there is no place to trade Swag or Travel BUGS/COINS! But I have seen some very creatively hidden film canisters in cemetaries etc, places where it would be nearly impossible to hide my perferred ammo boxes. Anything smaller than a film canister tho, count me out. It ceases to be fun. We did 4 micros today because they were the only caches in the area, and one virtual. The historical virual was the only one that was really interesting.

 

==========================================================================

 

It seems that there are so many micros...

 

with little or no thought to their placement

You do realize that these are two separate issues, right?

A cache placed with little to no thought or creativity is lame, (to me), regardless of size.

 

That being said;

Personally, I don't think it's a coincidence that the vast majority of hides with a creativity vacuum are micros. It's been my experience that the type of person who gets gratification from hiding caches with little or no thought largely belong to the quick and easy crowd. Anything resembling effort must be avoided by this group at all costs. Acquiring, hiding and maintaining a lamp post film can is a whole lot easier than doing the same thing with an ammo can at the end of a 9 mile paddle or 15 mile hike. Because the acquisition, hiding and maintenance of these stinkers is so much easier, the hiders have little to stop them from spewing out dozens of these hides at a time. As more and more people enter this playground, there will be a percentage of park & grab junkies. Has the percentage increased? Personally, I don't think so. I think they are simply hiding more caches that those folks who enjoy a challenge.

 

There is light at the end of your tunnel though!

 

If you haven't already, become a premium member, and adjust your pocket queries to ignore any cache listed as a micro, other or not selected. You'll never have to deal with a lame micro again, and you can focus your energies hunting the types of hides you prefer. Complaining about something that will not change, and which you are capable of avoiding, makes you look like you are whining, and has a negative impact on your credibility.

[GOF and Bacall]

Sign me up for this one, too. I am waiting as well.

Two hours and counting...

 

Not a fan of most micros. The few I liked were mostly in interesting places. The best way I know of to find only these micros is to visit a place you want to see and then see if there is a cache or two in the area.

[+fizzymagic]

Sign me up for this one, too. I am waiting as well.

Two hours and counting...

Not a fan of most micros. The few I liked were mostly in interesting places.

Yeah, but I like a lot of micros. Some of the most clever camo jobs I have seen were micros; and some micros have led me to fantastic places.

 

But recall that t4e said:

its [sic] easy to avoid the uninspired and thoughtless hide techniques ones

I am really anxious to find out how to achieve this goal. It's now been 10 hours, and he has had the time to post 3 times to the forums, so it can't be that he didn't see the request...

[GOF and Bacall]

Sign me up for this one, too. I am waiting as well.

Two hours and counting...

Not a fan of most micros. The few I liked were mostly in interesting places.

Yeah, but I like a lot of micros. Some of the most clever camo jobs I have seen were micros; and some micros have led me to fantastic places.

 

But recall that t4e said:

its [sic] easy to avoid the uninspired and thoughtless hide techniques ones

I am really anxious to find out how to achieve this goal. It's now been 10 hours, and he has had the time to post 3 times to the forums, so it can't be that he didn't see the request...

 

My whole reply addressed the question of how with this bit

The best way I know of to find only these micros is to visit a place you want to see and then see if there is a cache or two in the area.

 

But yes, I to would like to know what the easy way to sort out the trash is.

[+michigansnorkelers]

Well, I'm not sure how quick and easy this is, but here is one method to look for unique caches of any kind.

 

I did a PQ for micros in my area.

 

Then I looked at the gallery for interesting pictures.

 

I came up with this VERY unique micro, that I am too unfit to attempt.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...=y&decrypt=

 

Also, I believe there is a GSAK macro that sorts caches according to length of logs. That might help too.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I don't get why everyone is saying that micros and nanos are terrible

Because 98.2% of them are crappy containers, at uninspired locations, using thoughtless hide techniques and zero creativity cache pages?

Essentially hidden for no other reason than to give yet another smiley to some one who is too lazy to walk 15' from their car?

(Note: When you don't know the real statistics, making up your own, on the spot, is a time honored Internet tradition)

 

Hmmm... I've got sixteen (or so) micros. Most of them take you to very interesting places and/or great views, and where only a micro could be hidden. (Okay. I will admit to hiding one as a satire, but no one has ever noticed the satire...)

Is this view worth hunting for a nano?

 

 

On the other fin, there do seem to be a lot of completely worthless ones... (My QC department does not permit me to hide those. Oh, well.) I'm saving the new shopping center micro for a day when need a quick fix. If the cache lasts that long...

[+t4e]

Not a fan of most micros. The few I liked were mostly in interesting places.

Yeah, but I like a lot of micros. Some of the most clever camo jobs I have seen were micros; and some micros have led me to fantastic places.

 

But recall that t4e said:

its [sic] easy to avoid the uninspired and thoughtless hide techniques ones

I am really anxious to find out how to achieve this goal. It's now been 10 hours, and he has had the time to post 3 times to the forums, so it can't be that he didn't see the request...

 

i won't quote everyone that showed interest in my solution, but this post required an additional answer

 

pardon me for the late reply but i went out caching instead of sitting in the forums looking at the replies

 

in my experience the majority of uninspired micro hides are the 1-2 difficulty and low terrain rating in urban settings

 

so my solution?...simple, pick anything above 2-2.5 difficulty, combine that with higher terrain rating too and while is not 100% guaranteed that its not overrated you have vastly reduced your chance of getting an uninspired hide

 

coincidentally while you were all waiting for me to reply we out to this one 100% PURE EVIL, unfortunately after 30 minutes of fruitless search for stage one i contacted the CO and he confirmed some of the needed info is missing so we'll have to go back

 

hmmm and i just noticed all the pictures on that listing are gone, anyway the final is at some beautiful falls

 

i'll see if i can find more that we visited, but don't hold your breath for a quick reply because we got a full day of caching planned on the Niagara Escarpment

 

 

and btw i am not a "he"

Edited September 4, 2010 by t4e

[+L0ne.R]

Is this view worth hunting for a nano?

 

 

Nice view indeed. But why a nano? Looks like lots of large hiding spots in that photo.

[GOF and Bacall]

Not a fan of most micros. The few I liked were mostly in interesting places.

Yeah, but I like a lot of micros. Some of the most clever camo jobs I have seen were micros; and some micros have led me to fantastic places.

 

But recall that t4e said:

its [sic] easy to avoid the uninspired and thoughtless hide techniques ones

I am really anxious to find out how to achieve this goal. It's now been 10 hours, and he has had the time to post 3 times to the forums, so it can't be that he didn't see the request...

 

i won't quote everyone that showed interest in my solution, but this post required an additional answer

 

pardon me for the late reply but i went out caching instead of sitting in the forums looking at the replies

 

in my experience the majority of uninspired micro hides are the 1-2 difficulty and low terrain rating in urban settings

 

so my solution?...simple, pick anything above 2-2.5 difficulty, combine that with higher terrain rating too and while is not 100% guaranteed that its not overrated you have vastly reduced your chance of getting an uninspired hide

 

coincidentally while you were all waiting for me to reply we out to this one 100% PURE EVIL, unfortunately after 30 minutes of fruitless search for stage one i contacted the CO and he confirmed some of the needed info is missing so we'll have to go back

 

hmmm and i just noticed all the pictures on that listing are gone, anyway the final is at some beautiful falls

 

i'll see if i can find more that we visited, but don't hold your breath for a quick reply because we got a full day of caching planned on the Niagara Escarpment

 

 

and btw i am not a "he"

 

He she or it, doesn't really matter.

 

I have to say, the plan is a let down. Nothing new and really misses a lot of interesting territory.

[+JesandTodd]

It's still an easy way to avoid "most" lame micros...

[GOF and Bacall]

It's still an easy way to avoid "most" lame micros...

 

But not all by a long shot. I've seen enough crappy micros with high ratings. Placing a magnetic nano 15 feet up a pole doesn't make it interesting, just more difficult to reach.

[+SniperChicken]

One of things that keeps cachers interested in geocaching is in discovering a new hide technique or a unique camo technique. I have found far more "interesting" or well camoed micros that i have regular sized containers. I guess more cachers tend to experiment with the smaller containers. I LOVE finding those handmade customized micros ! A have seen a few really nice ammo cans done up real nice but for creativity i have to give it to the micro size containers.

 

An uninteresting cache (of any size) placed in an area of no significance will bore everyone but the ones who hunt just so they can get another point added to their find tally. The numbers hos may complain about "micro spew";but they will still go out and log it.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Is this view worth hunting for a nano?

 

Nice view indeed. But why a nano? Looks like lots of large hiding spots in that photo.

Because the river bank is fenced off.

[GOF and Bacall]

I don't get why everyone is saying that micros and nanos are terrible

Because 98.2% of them are crappy containers, at uninspired locations, using thoughtless hide techniques and zero creativity cache pages?

Essentially hidden for no other reason than to give yet another smiley to some one who is too lazy to walk 15' from their car?

(Note: When you don't know the real statistics, making up your own, on the spot, is a time honored Internet tradition)

 

Hmmm... I've got sixteen (or so) micros. Most of them take you to very interesting places and/or great views, and where only a micro could be hidden. (Okay. I will admit to hiding one as a satire, but no one has ever noticed the satire...)

Is this view worth hunting for a nano?

 

 

On the other fin, there do seem to be a lot of completely worthless ones... (My QC department does not permit me to hide those. Oh, well.) I'm saving the new shopping center micro for a day when need a quick fix. If the cache lasts that long...

 

Not to shabby. The sad part is that such hides get lost in the vast sea of pointless mediocrity that is a generous description of most micro hides.

[Clan Riffster]

Is this view worth hunting for a nano?

While I'm sure it would be for most people, it doesn't do much for me. Not that it's a bad view, mind you. It's just that cities repel me. All that concrete is like a poison to my soul. If that water way is Upper Bay, (hard for me to tell as it's been many decades since I've been there), then it would have even less appeal to me, as I'm not a fan of polluted waterways, and according to the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, the water there is not suitable for man or fish.

 

Again, strictly a matter of preference.

 

Someone who wasn't such a concretaphobe would probably love it.

[Mr.Yuck]

Is this view worth hunting for a nano?

While I'm sure it would be for most people, it doesn't do much for me. Not that it's a bad view, mind you. It's just that cities repel me. All that concrete is like a poison to my soul. If that water way is Upper Bay, (hard for me to tell as it's been many decades since I've been there), then it would have even less appeal to me, as I'm not a fan of polluted waterways, and according to the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, the water there is not suitable for man or fish.

 

Again, strictly a matter of preference.

 

Someone who wasn't such a concretaphobe would probably love it.

 

I'll go with Hudson River, pretty much standing on top of the Lincoln Tunnel. Upper Bay is more like Staten Island Ferry/Statue of Liberty territory. True, I didn't see any Dolphins in it when I was there on the Ferry a month or so ago.

[Clan Riffster]

I'll go with Hudson River, pretty much standing on top of the Lincoln Tunnel.

I must bow to your expertise. My last visit was so long ago I think the only things poking above the smog were the Empire State Building and Manhatten Plaza.

[+t4e]

I have to say, the plan is a let down. Nothing new and really misses a lot of interesting territory.

 

works for us very well

not sure what "interesting territory" you're talking about, we sure don't miss much because we don't automatically assume that a micro is lame, although you can pretty much tell from the description, and actually visit most of them

 

 

But not all by a long shot. I've seen enough crappy micros with high ratings. Placing a magnetic nano 15 feet up a pole doesn't make it interesting, just more difficult to reach.

 

i never said the system is perfect, i did in fact point out that in my original reply

 

but i know that for those that have their mind set on disliking something there is no way to convince them otherwise

 

my stand is that everyone is free to chose what they like and dislike, as long as they don't impose their views on me

 

and here some of the examples i promised

 

Gorgeous Elora

 

Getting Warmer

 

I Am Evil Homer

 

Night Crew

 

H2O Mini Power Trail

not all micros but most were, and the 9KM round trip by canoe was beautiful

 

an Ammo Can In The Woods

although is listed as an "other" it is a micro, won't say more in case people from my area that haven't found it read the forums

 

Pip's Way

this is one of those that although has a low D/T the description tells you that is in a great place, and we were not disappointed

[GOF and Bacall]

I have to say, the plan is a let down. Nothing new and really misses a lot of interesting territory.

 

works for us very well

not sure what "interesting territory" you're talking about, we sure don't miss much because we don't automatically assume that a micro is lame, although you can pretty much tell from the description, and actually visit most of them

 

 

But not all by a long shot. I've seen enough crappy micros with high ratings. Placing a magnetic nano 15 feet up a pole doesn't make it interesting, just more difficult to reach.

 

i never said the system is perfect, i did in fact point out that in my original reply

 

but i know that for those that have their mind set on disliking something there is no way to convince them otherwise

 

my stand is that everyone is free to chose what they like and dislike, as long as they don't impose their views on me

 

and here some of the examples i promised

 

Gorgeous Elora

 

Getting Warmer

 

I Am Evil Homer

 

Night Crew

 

H2O Mini Power Trail

not all micros but most were, and the 9KM round trip by canoe was beautiful

 

an Ammo Can In The Woods

although is listed as an "other" it is a micro, won't say more in case people from my area that haven't found it read the forums

 

Pip's Way

this is one of those that although has a low D/T the description tells you that is in a great place, and we were not disappointed

 

All I am trying to say is that your system to make it

easy to avoid the uninspired and thoughtless hide techniques ones

is still the same old sledge hammer flyswatter deal we have had all along.

 

Unless someone says "Hey, check out such and such cache. It is a cool micro hide" I'm not likely to bother with it. Too much chaff to sort through to find the good grain.