Micros the scurge of geocaching and maybe the end?

[+t4e]

 

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.

 

maybe it is, so far when we picked the ones with a difficulty above 2-2.5 we've hardly been disappointed

could well be due to the fact that you and me have different expectations and definition for a "wow" cache

 

tbh i've started to prefer micros over any other size quite some time ago

most of my hides are micros now

and that is because i find them less intrusive to the environment, more versatile in the sense that allows for more ingenuity, not as likely to be muggled and not turning into people's trash can after the good swag is gone

[+tozainamboku]

tbh i've started to prefer micros over any other size quite some time ago

most of my hides are micros now

and that is because i find them less intrusive to the environment, more versatile in the sense that allows for more ingenuity, not as likely to be muggled and not turning into people's trash can after the good swag is gone

 

I keep looking at the title of this thread and seeing how it just as easily could say "Micros the salvation of geocaching and maybe the start of more clever interesting caches in interesting places."

 

Clearly some people want to associate micros with caches placed in locations they don't find particularly interesting. And of course they also associate micros with hiding styles that while original the first time you see them, get old pretty quickly. But when told to just stop looking for micros, or just stop looking for 1/1 micros they complain that they will miss some of the best clever hides or ones with unexpected views or that bring you to an interesting monument that you wouldn't have found otherwise. It is in fact the micro cache that enables these clever hides at locations where are larger cache would be difficult to maintain.

 

I think what some people are looking for is a guarantee that either the location or something about the hide itself meets their definition for "wowness". It really is too bad we don't all have the same few of "wowness" and can agree that all caches will possess that.

 

I know that some people will argue that they don't demand all caches are "wow", only that no cache have some kind of anti-wow. They will list caches that are placed in some disgusting place next to a dumpster or that gets used by the homeless as a restroom. While I have found less than a handful like this in more than 6000 find, the cache owners either archived their cache or moved it once they were told what was going on. But of course there are more caches in the next level, where the location isn't really bad, but the cache may have been hidden without permission in places that have nothing unique about them like parking lots or bush hides in front of a business or residence. These hides are can be avoided. When you see the GPS arrrow is pointing to a parking lot or to the landscaping in front of an office building or residence, just stop searching and go to the next cache. If you know for certain that the cache was placed without permission, you can always post an needs archive. I think I understand the concern people have with the increase of caches in anti-wow locations. I just don't see how you can blame the container size for this

[+brslk]

What he said ^^^

[Mr.Yuck]

 

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.

 

maybe it is, so far when we picked the ones with a difficulty above 2-2.5 we've hardly been disappointed

could well be due to the fact that you and me have different expectations and definition for a "wow" cache

 

tbh i've started to prefer micros over any other size quite some time ago

most of my hides are micros now

and that is because i find them less intrusive to the environment, more versatile in the sense that allows for more ingenuity, not as likely to be muggled and not turning into people's trash can after the good swag is gone

 

Well, there's always that crowd that greatly increase difficulty due to the "muggle factor", say if they hid an LPC at Wally World in view of the front door or something. I'm not imagining this, I've seen hundreds and hundreds of cache pages that state they are doing this.

 

I do know a guy (and I'm sure he's never set foot in these forums), that likes micros because "they're harder to find". And his hides reflect that, micros on bike trails and such. I can see where you're both coming from. But I think, especially amongst highly active cachers who are into this game and ain't going away, that you and him are in a distinct minority. Considering old schoolers like myself who like to go to hikes to caches I'm probably going to find when I get there, and the "numbers crowd" who like to rack up the finds.

[+Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat]

Depends for me....If the micro takes me somewhere interesting, then me likey! If it`s another stupid `micro in the woods just because they wanted to put out a cache`then I barely bother.

You sometimes know that a cache isn`t great when a cacher who usually writes long logs, puts a simple `TFTH`in their found it.

[Clan Riffster]

Micros the salvation of geocaching and maybe the start of more clever interesting caches in interesting places.

That title would be just as inaccurate as the original one.

[+t4e]

 

Well, there's always that crowd that greatly increase difficulty due to the "muggle factor", say if they hid an LPC at Wally World in view of the front door or something. I'm not imagining this, I've seen hundreds and hundreds of cache pages that state they are doing this.

 

I do know a guy (and I'm sure he's never set foot in these forums), that likes micros because "they're harder to find". And his hides reflect that, micros on bike trails and such. I can see where you're both coming from. But I think, especially amongst highly active cachers who are into this game and ain't going away, that you and him are in a distinct minority. Considering old schoolers like myself who like to go to hikes to caches I'm probably going to find when I get there, and the "numbers crowd" who like to rack up the finds.

 

but you can always tell from the google maps if its a parking lot hide

 

as for hikes to caches, yes we like that too and my whole point, which agrees with tozainamboku, was that size has nothing to do with the place where its hidden or how ingenious the hide is,

 

you can see from the few examples of caches i posted earlier that we like hikes too, its not always about the hide itself but rather the place where is taking us

[Clan Riffster]

Size has nothing to do with the place where its hidden or how ingenious the hide is

Which, while true in theory, directly contradicts reality in practice.

While it's great that you were able to come up with seven examples of well thought out micros, out of 1,178,938 active caches, (most of which are micros, based on my observations), I think it's safe to say that this is not the norm. While many cachers are tolerant of those caches of lesser volume, enjoying all hides regardless of location or hide technique, (kudos to them), those who have a preference regarding quality seem to find similarities regarding what constitutes a so called "quality" hide. After determining what is a quality hide, it becomes immediately obvious that the majority of micros don't fit in this category. While my findings are limited geographically, judging by the vast number of micro bashing threads that populate these forums, they seem consistent with the rest of the world. I run a separate PQ for micros, and out of 500 listed caches, only 11 had a D/T rating over 2/2. My PQ for regular caches shows over 200 out of 500 with DT ratings above 2/2. Since D/T was your proposed means for determining if a micro cache was ingenious, or in a nice setting, it appears that size does have something to do with quality.

 

At that point, the obvious question is "Why?". Why are micros so commonly created with low D/T ratings? In talking to folks who love hiding micros, the trend I see is that they are more focused on numbers, and less focused on creating unique experiences. They believe that quantity trumps quality, and see themselves as giving more to the community by creating 50 P&Gs which can be found with a few hours of dashing about, than if they created 1 hide which took all day to reach. Not that this is a bad thing, since they are creating caches of the type they enjoy, their actions do result in a profusion of caches which, according to your standards, are low quality.

 

The end result, in practice?

 

Size does have a direct influence on quality.

 

Those who prefer hiding micros typically use crappy containers in uninspired locations, with thoughtless hide techniques.

(The quintessential definition of micro-spew)

 

If quality is less important to you than quantity, this is a plus.

[+t4e]

 

While it's great that you were able to come up with seven examples of well thought out micros, out of 1,178,938 active caches, (most of which are micros, based on my observations)

 

not a relevant comparison, i can't possibly have knowledge, and neither do you, of all 1,178,938 active caches

 

more appropriate is to compare to the little over 1800 finds i have, and even that will not be accurate

i picked a few of the more recent examples for the sake of the argument, i am not going to waste my time looking at all 1800 caches i found just to satisfy you argument

 

Since D/T was your proposed means for determining if a micro cache was ingenious, or in a nice setting, it appears that size does have something to do with quality.

 

not at all, not sure where you got that conclusion from

i've seen plenty of ammo cans and regular size caches tossed in the woods

if you're implying that because a cache is an ammo box i should be beside myself with joy, its not the case here

 

At that point, the obvious question is "Why?". Why are micros so commonly created with low D/T ratings?

 

again not true, yes the majority D/T 1 are micros but there's plenty of other sizes at that rating

 

In talking to folks who love hiding micros, the trend I see is that they are more focused on numbers, and less focused on creating unique experiences. They believe that quantity trumps quality, and see themselves as giving more to the community by creating 50 P&Gs which can be found with a few hours of dashing about, than if they created 1 hide which took all day to reach. Not that this is a bad thing, since they are creating caches of the type they enjoy, their actions do result in a profusion of caches which, according to your standards, are low quality.

 

that is their choice and i don't care to impose on people how to play the game and what to hide/hunt and neither should anyone else

 

The end result, in practice?

 

Size does have a direct influence on quality.

 

Those who prefer hiding micros typically use crappy containers in uninspired locations, with thoughtless hide techniques.

(The quintessential definition of micro-spew)

 

nope, size doesn't affect quality as i said above

 

and don't generalize, its not typical at all

 

If quality is less important to you than quantity, this is a plus.

 

that sentence doesn't quite make sense, you mean is good to choose quantity over quality?

[+JesandTodd]

Ehh..I've seen some pretty creative micros!! Very clever ones... But to be honest, I've yet to come across a clever ammo can (except my own cache, and that's a micro!). And more often than not they are filled with junk. And I mean trash, waste, junky junk. The only thing I like about large caches is that there may be a TB in there...

 

Othewise, I'll probably have a much more mentally challenging time with micros.

So, to each their own. Wish everyone could have that attitude...

[Clan Riffster]

not at all, not sure where you got that conclusion from

From your earlier posts.

How else could I, a stranger, determine what you believe to be quality?

Quality is a strictly subjective term in this context, as some folks seem to prefer leaky containers in grimy parking lots.

Since I don't know you, and haven't cached with you, I can only use what you post to make any kind of accurate deduction concerning your preferences.

But you already knew that, didn't you?

 

yes the majority D/T 1 are micros but there's plenty of other sizes at that rating

Insert "Duh" here. You do realize that we are saying the exact same thing, right? I say the majority of micros have low D/T ratings. You say the majority of micros have low D/T ratings. Yet, you are so desperate to argue, over anything, that you would even debate this point? That's kinda sad, actually. If you'll read what I typed, you'll find that I never so much as hinted that there were no regular or large caches with low D/T ratings. And yet, knowing this, knowing I never said anything remotely close to this, you would still argue this point? Really?

 

size doesn't affect quality as i said above

Actually, what you said is quite the opposite.

But I suspect you know that, and at this stage you are just arguing to hear yourself type.

 

and don't generalize, its not typical at all

Oh... Sorry. I didn't realize you held the pattent on generalizing.

[Mr.Yuck]

 

Well, there's always that crowd that greatly increase difficulty due to the "muggle factor", say if they hid an LPC at Wally World in view of the front door or something. I'm not imagining this, I've seen hundreds and hundreds of cache pages that state they are doing this.

 

I do know a guy (and I'm sure he's never set foot in these forums), that likes micros because "they're harder to find". And his hides reflect that, micros on bike trails and such. I can see where you're both coming from. But I think, especially amongst highly active cachers who are into this game and ain't going away, that you and him are in a distinct minority. Considering old schoolers like myself who like to go to hikes to caches I'm probably going to find when I get there, and the "numbers crowd" who like to rack up the finds.

 

but you can always tell from the google maps if its a parking lot hide

 

as for hikes to caches, yes we like that too and my whole point, which agrees with tozainamboku, was that size has nothing to do with the place where its hidden or how ingenious the hide is,

 

you can see from the few examples of caches i posted earlier that we like hikes too, its not always about the hide itself but rather the place where is taking us

 

Well, Mr. Yuck does indeed study caches on a one by one basis as they are published, and uses the Google maps to tell if it's a parking lot hide. However, I believe the people you are debating with (Clan Riffster, Gof's Sock Puppet and Fizzy Magic), are (and have been for years), looking for a zero-miss way of more automated filtering techniques. And it probably will never be available.

[meharryg]

I know many dont like micros and neither do I. Lately I have been wondering if they will be the eventual end of geocaching. We are lucky enough to live in an area that has over 2000 geocaches within 25 miles of the house unfortunately the majority of them are micros. It seems that there are so many micros with little or no thought to their placement that it has gotten to the point they are interfering with the placement of larger caches due to the over saturation rule. So why if so many feel the same way are there still so many micros placed around. This should be about quality not quantity and I fear if this trend continues we will not draw nearly as many new cachers to keep the sport growing. OK off my soap box and maybe off to find a good ole ammo can.

 

Some Micros can be tedious but sometimes they are brilliant, their small size providing a wide variety of interesting locations that no other caches could get to, so no, micros definitely will not be the end of geocaching.

[Clan Riffster]

...looking for a zero-miss way of more automated filtering techniques...

Just to clarify... I already have an effective way of separating the wheat from the chaff.

By using my method, I find only those caches that fit my biased aesthetic, and my game play is a happier experience.

While it can be time consuming, and a bit cumbersome, the ends justify the means, to someone as picky as myself.

But t4e suggested there was an "easy" way to do this. That's what I'm waiting for... still.

[+JesandTodd]

But t4e suggested there was an "easy" way to do this. That's what I'm waiting for... still.

She gave it to you, you just didn't like it. I bet it's easy for her, and it works for her. But instead of accepting it and letting it go, you instead berate her. And, well, it's already old. (I never can find that yawn emoticon...)

 

And to think I actually missed the forums. Silly me. I forgot all about the bullying that goes on here.

[+FireRef]

I think that something that a lot of people don't take into account is the fact that while some people like numbers, some don't - Some like cool places, some don't care - Some want large containers, some want smaller, and some don't care... I think that some people just like knowing something is hidden somewhere that almost no one else does. That is part of why I like doing geocaching - sometimes its a nice place to go, sometimes its just a smiley for the number, but always, its something I know is there and almost no one else does. Middle of the woods, middle of a mountaintop, or middle of a Wally-world parking lot, all three meet this requirement for me, and I'm happy to look for any of them.

[Clan Riffster]

But t4e suggested there was an "easy" way to do this. That's what I'm waiting for... still.

She gave it to you, you just didn't like it.

She may have. Perhaps I missed it. Lemme go check....

(time passes...)

Nope. I got nothing that would qualify as "easy".

Perhaps you think that reading 500 cache pages, zooming in on 500 maps, is "easy"?

If so, I'd hate to see what you call challenging. It would likely leave me screaming like a little girl.

[+t4e]

But t4e suggested there was an "easy" way to do this. That's what I'm waiting for... still.

She gave it to you, you just didn't like it. I bet it's easy for her, and it works for her. But instead of accepting it and letting it go, you instead berate her. And, well, it's already old. (I never can find that yawn emoticon...)

 

And to think I actually missed the forums. Silly me. I forgot all about the bullying that goes on here.

 

thanks at least someone got it, i was beginning to think i'm not making any sense in my posts

 

 

She may have. Perhaps I missed it. Lemme go check....

(time passes...)

Nope. I got nothing that would qualify as "easy".

Perhaps you think that reading 500 cache pages, zooming in on 500 maps, is "easy"?

If so, I'd hate to see what you call challenging. It would likely leave me screaming like a little girl.

 

sure i did, and its in post #239, and its not what you're suggesting, zooming in on 500 google pages" and i never said its going to be a good solution for everyone

if you read #250 i said "it works well for us", and JesandTodd got that

 

i had and have no intention of convincing anyone to like micros, i was expressing my opinion and sharing my solution

if its not working for everyone, too bad

Edited September 6, 2010 by t4e

[Clan Riffster]

sure i did, and its in post #239

Awesome! I see where I erred. I was under the mistaken impression that when you said there was an "easy" way to find only quality micro hides, that you actually had an "easy" way of finding only quality micro hides. Had I realized that your method of cache selection was never designed to weed out all of the quality hides from the sub-par hides, (as you claimed earlier), I would have dropped it right there. Thank you for clarifying that.

 

i had and have no intention of convincing anyone to like micros

While I salute your stance on this issue, (one we share, by the way), I am curious to discover why you would argue about it?

I don't recall anyone even remotely suggesting otherwise...

[+GeoGeeBee]

But t4e suggested there was an "easy" way to do this. That's what I'm waiting for... still.

She gave it to you, you just didn't like it. I bet it's easy for her, and it works for her. But instead of accepting it and letting it go, you instead berate her. And, well, it's already old. (I never can find that yawn emoticon...)

 

And to think I actually missed the forums. Silly me. I forgot all about the bullying that goes on here.

 

Is it "bullying" to disagree with someone? No wonder there is so much angst in the forums. Some people see a lively discussion, and other people see bullying.

 

Forums where there is never any disagreement would be awfully boring.

[+t4e]

sure i did, and its in post #239

Awesome! I see where I erred. I was under the mistaken impression that when you said there was an "easy" way to find only quality micro hides, that you actually had an "easy" way of finding only quality micro hides. Had I realized that your method of cache selection was never designed to weed out all of the quality hides from the sub-par hides, (as you claimed earlier), I would have dropped it right there. Thank you for clarifying that.

 

i had and have no intention of convincing anyone to like micros

While I salute your stance on this issue, (one we share, by the way), I am curious to discover why you would argue about it?

I don't recall anyone even remotely suggesting otherwise...

 

not at all, as i said

 

i was expressing my opinion and sharing my solution

 

 

besides you know what they say about arguing on the internet, right?

[The Dommer Party]

I can understand the different points of view on micros and nanos. We're still pretty green, so maybe they will grow old... who knows.

 

But I have to say that if it weren't for the 3 micros/nanos that were literally within a couple blocks of my house, we may never have bothered to try this game. We've since ventured out to forest preserves, parks, etc that we hadn't been to in years if ever, all in search of caches. But it was those small ones that were minutes away that prompted us to go ahead and try it just to see what geocaching was like.

[Clan Riffster]

besides you know what they say about arguing on the internet, right?

[Trader Rick & Rosie]

nanos are really stupid.

[+JesandTodd]

Is it "bullying" to disagree with someone? No wonder there is so much angst in the forums. Some people see a lively discussion, and other people see bullying.

 

Forums where there is never any disagreement would be awfully boring.

 

Lively discussion? Haha! Some of the 'experienced' members if this forum remind me of my 15 yr old nephew w/ADHD. I half expected a "I know you are but what am I" to come next.

This isnt lively discussion. It's a member who can't accept that are were wrong, so they start micro-analyzing certain words to their benefit. It's not lively, it's old.

 

And I cant help but notice how the tone changed in here once "he" was found to be a "she"...

[Clan Riffster]

And I cant help but notice how the tone changed in here once "he" was found to be a "she"...

One can only assume then, that you haven't been paying attention. Personally, I've known her gender since she started posting in this thread, from other discussions we've had in the past. For those who were not aware of her gender, she made it clear way back in post 239. Had you been paying attention, (not something I would expect from someone on an Internet forum), you would've observed that the tone change didn't occur until somewhere around post 274. Loads of snark in-betwixt the two.

 

But kudos to you anyway, for championing her cause. That's pretty noble!

[+roziecakes]

I stayed out of this discussion because I didn't have anything that great, but for the record I've known t4e was female since I first read one of her posts, which was several months ago when I started being more active on the forums. I look at people's profiles, and their gallery pictures before I make any 'gender assumptions.'

 

Bittsen though... I'll never reveal the secret.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Ah. Hmm... Found 21 caches this weekend. 12 were on my Ten-Mile List. Yeah. I know. That's an anything and everything list. But I do keep working on it.... (Oh, and I did get some glowing logs on my micros along the Palisades/Hudson River Waterfront...)

Climbed 300 feet for a virtual on the cliffs overlooking the Delaware River. Spectacular! Bushwhacked through a swampy area for three caches. Great, though tiring. Found a beautiful park. But they're not on my Ten-Mile List. Oh , well.

On my Ten-Mile List: 300 foot climb for a two mile hike for three caches. Great! (Though the micro hidden in the rocks was just stupid!) Two mile hike through the Audobon Society Park for three small contaiers. Great! Abandoned baseball field for a cache in a baseball. Not bad, though a few too many rose bushes. Then we come to today. Gave up trying to bushwhack through the tall fields at the WMA. Oh, well. MKH under the power supply at a shopping center. Small container in the parking lot of a restauant. Pretzel container .14 up a dirt road overlooking the golf course. Best of the day! (And that's not saying much!) Glad Ware container hidden in a stream bed? You've got to be kidding! First rain, it's gone. Regular-sized nut container under a bridge near a baseball field. Actually not too bad. But I could see the smiley face through the wood on the bridge. Camo needed! Last one there lasted a week. Doubt it'll last through a good rain. Yeah. I should stop trying to clear my Ten-Mle List. Especially since it has ten kayaking caches, and two tree climbing caches. Oh, well.

It's not the size of the cache. It's the care and consideration that the cache owner puts into the hide!

[Clan Riffster]

It's not the size of the cache. It's the care and consideration that the cache owner puts into the hide!

That!

[GOF and Bacall]

nanos are really stupid.

 

I tried to test this. I placed a nano on my keyboard and opened one of those IQtest sites. I left the room for half an hour. When I returned the nano had answered none of the questions correctly. But to be honest it also answered none of them incorrectly. So now I don't know if it was stupid, or just lazy.

[+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.

 

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

While I realize that you are full of opinions, the example area doesn't fit the quantifiable aspects of your previous post. It doesn't appear to fit the subjective measures, either, but that's just one person's opinion.

[+sbell111]

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."

You could simply use the easy peasey method described to you and others in the many previous threads on this topic.

[+sbell111]

... I do know a guy (and I'm sure he's never set foot in these forums), that likes micros because "they're harder to find". And his hides reflect that, micros on bike trails and such. I can see where you're both coming from. But I think, especially amongst highly active cachers who are into this game and ain't going away, that you and him are in a distinct minority. Considering old schoolers like myself who like to go to hikes to caches I'm probably going to find when I get there, and the "numbers crowd" who like to rack up the finds.

I bet that you are dead wrong. I bet that most 'old schoolers' (like me) have learned to get more out of the game than just the 'wow' and aren't demoralized if they happen to find a cache that doesn't twist their socks. Further, I bet that most 'old schoolers' have figured out the simple ways to maximize their odds of looking for caches that they will like and avoid those that they won't. This is espcially true since methods to do this have been discussed many, many times in this forum.

[+sbell111]

(Clan Riffster, Gof's Sock Puppet and Fizzy Magic), are (and have been for years), looking for a zero-miss way of more automated filtering techniques. And it probably will never be available.

Of course it will never be available because what each of them think is a great cache is much, much different than what someone else thinks is great. Therefore, they will never be able to push a button and return all of the caches that they think is great, and only those caches.

[+sbell111]

But t4e suggested there was an "easy" way to do this. That's what I'm waiting for... still.

She gave it to you, you just didn't like it. I bet it's easy for her, and it works for her. But instead of accepting it and letting it go, you instead berate her. And, well, it's already old. (I never can find that yawn emoticon...)

 

And to think I actually missed the forums. Silly me. I forgot all about the bullying that goes on here.

 

Is it "bullying" to disagree with someone? No wonder there is so much angst in the forums. Some people see a lively discussion, and other people see bullying.

 

Forums where there is never any disagreement would be awfully boring.

It is bullying to ask someone a question, have it answered and then to repeatedly demand that they answer the question to your satisfaction. Edited September 7, 2010 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

And I cant help but notice how the tone changed in here once "he" was found to be a "she"...

One can only assume then, that you haven't been paying attention. Personally, I've known her gender since she started posting in this thread, from other discussions we've had in the past. For those who were not aware of her gender, she made it clear way back in post 239. Had you been paying attention, (not something I would expect from someone on an Internet forum), you would've observed that the tone change didn't occur until somewhere around post 274. Loads of snark in-betwixt the two.

 

But kudos to you anyway, for championing her cause. That's pretty noble!

Thanks for another good example of bullying.

[+sbell111]

Ah. Hmm... Found 21 caches this weekend. 12 were on my Ten-Mile List. Yeah. I know. That's an anything and everything list. But I do keep working on it.... (Oh, and I did get some glowing logs on my micros along the Palisades/Hudson River Waterfront...)

Climbed 300 feet for a virtual on the cliffs overlooking the Delaware River. Spectacular! Bushwhacked through a swampy area for three caches. Great, though tiring. Found a beautiful park. But they're not on my Ten-Mile List. Oh , well.

On my Ten-Mile List: 300 foot climb for a two mile hike for three caches. Great! (Though the micro hidden in the rocks was just stupid!) Two mile hike through the Audobon Society Park for three small contaiers. Great! Abandoned baseball field for a cache in a baseball. Not bad, though a few too many rose bushes. Then we come to today. Gave up trying to bushwhack through the tall fields at the WMA. Oh, well. MKH under the power supply at a shopping center. Small container in the parking lot of a restauant. Pretzel container .14 up a dirt road overlooking the golf course. Best of the day! (And that's not saying much!) Glad Ware container hidden in a stream bed? You've got to be kidding! First rain, it's gone. Regular-sized nut container under a bridge near a baseball field. Actually not too bad. But I could see the smiley face through the wood on the bridge. Camo needed! Last one there lasted a week. Doubt it'll last through a good rain. Yeah. I should stop trying to clear my Ten-Mle List. Especially since it has ten kayaking caches, and two tree climbing caches. Oh, well.

It's not the size of the cache. It's the care and consideration that the cache owner puts into the hide!

Honestly, you seem a little whiny. Perhaps if you weren't working so hard at being dissatisfied you would have really enjoyed those.

[+bob in niagara]

All caches are fine, why do people complain about anything and everything, I'm handicapped and can hardly walk, perhaps I should complain about the terrain being difficult, but no, I filter the caches to the ones I can do. Great sport to participate in. No matter what anyone does there will be someone to complain. Here I am as an example, complaining about the complainers, ironic isn't it

[+bob in niagara]

All caches are fine, why do people complain about anything and everything, I'm handicapped and can hardly walk, perhaps I should complain about the terrain being difficult, but no, I filter the caches to the ones I can do. Great sport to participate in. No matter what anyone does there will be someone to complain. Here I am as an example, complaining about the complainers, ironic isn't it

[Trader Rick & Rosie]

All caches are fine, why do people complain about anything and everything, I'm handicapped and can hardly walk, perhaps I should complain about the terrain being difficult, but no, I filter the caches to the ones I can do. Great sport to participate in. No matter what anyone does there will be someone to complain. Here I am as an example, complaining about the complainers, ironic isn't it

 

All caches are NOT fine, people should complain about anything and everything if they are passionate about it, I filter the caches to the ones I want to do do,but sometimes am disappointed. Great sport to participate in. No matter what anyone does there will be someone with constructive criticism, that's a good thing. Here I am as an example, rolleyes.gif complaining about the complainers who complain about the complainers, ironic isn't IT?

[+sbell111]

All caches are fine, why do people complain about anything and everything, I'm handicapped and can hardly walk, perhaps I should complain about the terrain being difficult, but no, I filter the caches to the ones I can do. Great sport to participate in. No matter what anyone does there will be someone to complain. Here I am as an example, complaining about the complainers, ironic isn't it

 

All caches are NOT fine, people should complain about anything and everything if they are passionate about it, I filter the caches to the ones I want to do do,but sometimes am disappointed. Great sport to participate in. No matter what anyone does there will be someone with constructive criticism, that's a good thing. Here I am as an example, rolleyes.gif complaining about the complainers who complain about the complainers, ironic isn't IT?

Constructive criticism is generally a good thing. Of course, it's the destructive kind that we often see around here.

[OwlJones]

I'm ok with micro's. As a free market capitalist I find it totally understandable and hilariously odd (at the same time) that one website has almost a monopoly on geocaching information/locations/systems.

 

Micros though? Fine by me. whatever floats your boat.

Edited September 7, 2010 by OwlJones

[Clan Riffster]

You could simply use the easy peasey method

As you know, I do use the described "easy peasey" method. I've posted this dozens of times over the years, and you have commented on it yourself on several occasions. I love the "easy peasey" method. A few mouse clicks gives me results which greatly enhance my enjoyment of the game. However, the method I use is not quite relevant to this point in the discussion. At that stage in the discussion, we were talking about t4e's methods. t4e initially promised a method that would result in only quality hides or hides in interesting places. As you know, this was a promise that cannot be fulfilled. t4e later changed tack, describing a method that she feels would result in a high probability of quality hides. As we have similar definitions of what constitutes quality, I think her suggested method would work. Since t4e is no longer claiming that her method would result in only quality hides, as initially claimed, I support her method as both practical and easy, with desirable, yet unavoidably imperfect results.

 

It is bullying to ask someone a question, have it answered and then to repeatedly demand that they answer the question to your satisfaction.

Fortunately, that is not what happened here. The conversation was more like:

Q ) What is the square root of 42?

A ) Blue

Q ) What? How do you get a color out of a math question?

A ) You got your answer. You just didn't like it! You bully!

 

Thanks for another good example of bullying.

Pot, meet kettle.

[Trader Rick & Rosie]

OOH,OOH, LET ME!!!

 

[+Harry Dolphin]

Ah. Hmm... Found 21 caches this weekend. 12 were on my Ten-Mile List. Yeah. I know. That's an anything and everything list. But I do keep working on it.... (Oh, and I did get some glowing logs on my micros along the Palisades/Hudson River Waterfront...)

Climbed 300 feet for a virtual on the cliffs overlooking the Delaware River. Spectacular! Bushwhacked through a swampy area for three caches. Great, though tiring. Found a beautiful park. But they're not on my Ten-Mile List. Oh , well.

On my Ten-Mile List: 300 foot climb for a two mile hike for three caches. Great! (Though the micro hidden in the rocks was just stupid!) Two mile hike through the Audobon Society Park for three small contaiers. Great! Abandoned baseball field for a cache in a baseball. Not bad, though a few too many rose bushes. Then we come to today. Gave up trying to bushwhack through the tall fields at the WMA. Oh, well. MKH under the power supply at a shopping center. Small container in the parking lot of a restauant. Pretzel container .14 up a dirt road overlooking the golf course. Best of the day! (And that's not saying much!) Glad Ware container hidden in a stream bed? You've got to be kidding! First rain, it's gone. Regular-sized nut container under a bridge near a baseball field. Actually not too bad. But I could see the smiley face through the wood on the bridge. Camo needed! Last one there lasted a week. Doubt it'll last through a good rain. Yeah. I should stop trying to clear my Ten-Mle List. Especially since it has ten kayaking caches, and two tree climbing caches. Oh, well.

It's not the size of the cache. It's the care and consideration that the cache owner puts into the hide!

Honestly, you seem a little whiny. Perhaps if you weren't working so hard at being dissatisfied you would have really enjoyed those.

 

Darn! Then I have failed! "A little whiny"? Just comparing Pyramid Mountain in the northeast part of my county, and Loantaka Brook in the southeast against the cache and dashes on the southwest. Not even good cache and dashes. But they are worth a smiley! Doubt I'll ever enjoy anything that bad... Oh, well. Doesn't it count that I enjoyed immensely most of the caches I found this weekend?!?

[Trader Rick & Rosie]

Is it possible for robots to take over the world?

[Clan Riffster]

Is it possible for robots to take over the world?

Shhh!!! They already have!GeoBot

[+Team Moto]

I know many dont like micros and neither do I. Lately I have been wondering if they will be the eventual end of geocaching. We are lucky enough to live in an area that has over 2000 geocaches within 25 miles of the house unfortunately the majority of them are micros. It seems that there are so many micros with little or no thought to their placement that it has gotten to the point they are interfering with the placement of larger caches due to the over saturation rule. So why if so many feel the same way are there still so many micros placed around. This should be about quality not quantity and I fear if this trend continues we will not draw nearly as many new cachers to keep the sport growing. OK off my soap box and maybe off to find a good ole ammo can.

[+Team Moto]

We are currently in Phoenix AZ. It is littered with micros which are blocking the placement of regular caches. One cacher placed 47 micros in the Phoenix Mountain Preserve blocking several sq miles of great cache habitat.

 

I wish Ground Speak would remove micros from the traditional cache rules. This would open up some great areas for placement of caches that hold Travel Bugs, Geocoins and swag.

 

Micros are not traditional. It's too easy to get a bag of film cans, put a piece of paper in it, throw it in a bush and call it a cache.

[+GeoGeeBee]