(mis)naming a cache?

[+clumzyfly]

I placed a cache in a tree 4 feet from a light pole and called it Quick LPC PNG. Is that be too misleading? The purpose was to see if anyone would get out of their tunnel vision and just maybe look at the tree. Nothing special about the tree, I was just wondering. I already have a FTF hound disappointed in not finding it. They said they broadened their search, but I'm sure they just broadened it to other light poles. Should I not have named it as a LPC? There is a light pole there, the cache just ain't on it. I guess that is my real question.

 

Here is the cache in question.

GC2AQWY

 

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

Edited June 25, 2010 by clumzyfly

[GOF's Sock Puppet]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

[+clumzyfly]

The cache is a Little Purple Cache. I changed some stuff on the page, maybe now it is not such a misdirect. If people read the description(which I know not all do) then they will know that LPC in this case does not mean Lamp Post(or light pole) cache.

 

I have a few of these little purple caches that I plan to put out(uh oh, here come the nano bashers).

Edited June 25, 2010 by clumzyfly

[+niraD]

I've found a few that were located very near one or more typical hiding places (lamp posts, guard rails, park benches, etc.), but were actually hidden somewhere else. I've enjoyed the challenge, and the reminder not to assume that I know where a cache will be hidden just because a typical hiding place is visible as I approach GZ.

 

But actually calling it an LPC (or guard rail cache, or park bench cache, etc.) when it isn't one seems to be like providing an encrypted hint that actually misdirects the seeker, rather than helping the seeker.

[+brslk]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

If I call my cache a MIST must it be a micro in a spruce tree?

 

I don't think the title of a cache has to give away the location.

 

If the description says it is a micro in a spruce tree then that is wrong.

 

Cleaver?

 

I found one awhile ago that had "hidden among the trees" that was "among" the trees but was a fake rock on the ground...

 

Just like people need to look about 30' beyond GZ, they also need to not be hand fed the cache.

[GOF's Sock Puppet]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

If I call my cache a MIST must it be a micro in a spruce tree?

 

I don't think the title of a cache has to give away the location.

 

If the description says it is a micro in a spruce tree then that is wrong.

 

Cleaver?

 

I found one awhile ago that had "hidden among the trees" that was "among" the trees but was a fake rock on the ground...

 

Just like people need to look about 30' beyond GZ, they also need to not be hand fed the cache.

 

I didn't say that anyone should be hand fed the location. But intentionally misleading them is not clever. To say "hidden among the trees" is a far cry from say it is in a tree. I still say it is not clever.

[GOF's Sock Puppet]

The cache is a Little Purple Cache. I changed some stuff on the page, maybe now it is not such a misdirect. If people read the description(which I know not all do) then they will know that LPC in this case does not mean Lamp Post(or light pole) cache.

 

I have a few of these little purple caches that I plan to put out(uh oh, here come the nano bashers).

 

Better, but still not one I'd get a kick out of.

[+dorqie]

Well I like it.

I would enjoy finding it.

[+doc68]

I placed a cache in a tree 4 feet from a light pole and called it Quick LPC PNG. Is that be too misleading? The purpose was to see if anyone would get out of their tunnel vision and just maybe look at the tree. Nothing special about the tree, I was just wondering. I already have a FTF hound disappointed in not finding it. They said they broadened their search, but I'm sure they just broadened it to other light poles. Should I not have named it as a LPC? There is a light pole there, the cache just ain't on it. I guess that is my real question.

 

 

Of course there is nothing wrong with what you did to it as a listing. I would agree, keep the purple part in the synopsis. See how close of attention people pay to the listing as a whole. If you get more DNF's, maybe raise the difficulty a little. Great job!!.

[+Triple Crown]

I placed a cache in a tree 4 feet from a light pole and called it Quick LPC PNG. Is that be too misleading? The purpose was to see if anyone would get out of their tunnel vision and just maybe look at the tree. Nothing special about the tree, I was just wondering. I already have a FTF hound disappointed in not finding it. They said they broadened their search, but I'm sure they just broadened it to other light poles. Should I not have named it as a LPC? There is a light pole there, the cache just ain't on it. I guess that is my real question.

 

 

IMHO most cachers like to find the caches. Deliberately tricking or using bad coords on purpose is a quick way to get your caches ignored and to earn the reputation of a lame cache owner.

 

Difficult and challenging caches can be fun, but only if you expect them to be difficult and challenging. If I've got 10 minutes to grab a cache and am looking for an easy one, I get annoyed if I find the cache does not match the description.

 

Misleading or ironic titles can be fun, as long as the description gives the cacher enough information. In this case your (Little Purple Cache) is a small hint, but increasing the difficulty rating would help people expand their horizons and make them feel like they were part of the fun of the misdirection, rather than the butt of a joke.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Triple Crown

[+Pork King]

I placed a cache in a tree 4 feet from a light pole and called it Quick LPC PNG. Is that be too misleading? The purpose was to see if anyone would get out of their tunnel vision and just maybe look at the tree. Nothing special about the tree, I was just wondering. I already have a FTF hound disappointed in not finding it. They said they broadened their search, but I'm sure they just broadened it to other light poles. Should I not have named it as a LPC? There is a light pole there, the cache just ain't on it. I guess that is my real question.

 

Here is the cache in question.

GC2AQWY

 

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

 

I did one similar just the other day. I stopped looking at my GPS the minute I pulled into the parking lot, "knowing" right where the cache was. After a minute or so of tugging and twisting a LP 'skirt' that just wouldn't budge, I looked at my GPS. it showed about 30' away, pointing at a TREE, and there it was.

 

I wouldn't see a problem with what you are suggesting, as long as the coords are TIGHT.

[+The Ravens]

I think your original cache title and description was a great idea!

 

I say change it back and to those who don't like it. Clever in by book.

Edited June 25, 2010 by The Ravens

[+clumzyfly]

Thanks for your replies and suggestions. I think I will leave it as it is now and wait and see what happens.

[+power69]

I placed a cache in a tree 4 feet from a light pole and called it Quick LPC PNG. Is that be too misleading? The purpose was to see if anyone would get out of their tunnel vision and just maybe look at the tree. Nothing special about the tree, I was just wondering. I already have a FTF hound disappointed in not finding it. They said they broadened their search, but I'm sure they just broadened it to other light poles. Should I not have named it as a LPC? There is a light pole there, the cache just ain't on it. I guess that is my real question.

 

Here is the cache in question.

GC2AQWY

 

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

 

I did one similar just the other day. I stopped looking at my GPS the minute I pulled into the parking lot, "knowing" right where the cache was. After a minute or so of tugging and twisting a LP 'skirt' that just wouldn't budge, I looked at my GPS. it showed about 30' away, pointing at a TREE, and there it was.

I know of a lamp post cache that the base doesn't lift but you can peek under and if you stick a knife under there you can push the thin container out.

[+buttaskotch]

Well I like it.

I would enjoy finding it.

Really? After wasting time possibly vandalizing a LP only to find it's not there?

 

My opinion is that a lot of cachers will pry things off the lamp post and possibly electrocute themselves for a cache that is not there

Very bad idea

[knowschad]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

Proper spelling is much more improtant than grammar.

[knowschad]

I've seen clever misdirection used, but I'm not so sure this one is all that clever, even with the change to the cache page.

 

One, now long archived, cache that was infamous in my area spoke on the cache page about how the original contents being a hammer, a pair of pliers, and a screwdriver. Size was unspecified, but almost everyone was looking for an ammo box because of those contents. Turned out that those "tools" were from a doll house supply store, and the cache was a film cannister. Now, THAT was a fun "gotcha" moment!

 

Probably too many people have seen yours to change it now, but perhaps rather than "spelling it out for them" by literally explaining the meaning of LPC as Little Purple Cache, you could say, "Not every LPC is a skirt lifter. Expand your horizons and trust the coordinates.", and give them the fun of figuring out what LPC means when they find the little purple container. Just a thought.

[+atmospherium]

I didn't see the original write-up, but I think your cache page is fine right now. The cache has only had one logged dnf so far. Leave it as it is and see what responses you get from cachers who go looking for it. Never mind what the forum thinks. Opinions here vary so much as to be wellnigh useless in the real world.

[+The Ravens]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

Proper spelling is much more improtant than grammar.

 

A cleaver hide could equate to a hatchet job!

[GOF's Sock Puppet]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

Proper spelling is much more improtant than grammar.

Gimme a break. It was past my bedtime.

[+redtech]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

Proper spelling is much more improtant than grammar.

 

Improtant?

[+redtech]

I placed a cache in a tree 4 feet from a light pole and called it Quick LPC PNG. Is that be too misleading? The purpose was to see if anyone would get out of their tunnel vision and just maybe look at the tree. Nothing special about the tree, I was just wondering. I already have a FTF hound disappointed in not finding it. They said they broadened their search, but I'm sure they just broadened it to other light poles. Should I not have named it as a LPC? There is a light pole there, the cache just ain't on it. I guess that is my real question.

 

Here is the cache in question.

GC2AQWY

 

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

 

I did one similar just the other day. I stopped looking at my GPS the minute I pulled into the parking lot, "knowing" right where the cache was. After a minute or so of tugging and twisting a LP 'skirt' that just wouldn't budge, I looked at my GPS. it showed about 30' away, pointing at a TREE, and there it was.

I know of a lamp post cache that the base doesn't lift but you can peek under and if you stick a knife under there you can push the thin container out.

 

Aha.... I came across one the other day that wouldn't lift so I looked around a nearby tree and couldn't find it. There were lots of muggles so I fled. I guess I'll reach up inside that LP and see what I can find. Thanks!

[GOF's Sock Puppet]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

Proper spelling is much more improtant than grammar.

 

Improtant?

 

Did you follow the link? The bespectacled one was only obeying Muphry's law.

[knowschad]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

Proper spelling is much more improtant than grammar.

 

Improtant?

Click the link

[+redtech]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

*Edit for grammar, since I know that is the most important thing on a forum(insert sarcasm).

Proper spelling is much more improtant than grammar.

 

Improtant?

Click the link

 

dadgum. I didn't realize it was a link. I thought it was just underlined for emphasis.

[+42at42]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

The name says "Revenge of the LPC" The description says simply "Little Purple Cache".

 

If you read the page, interpret it correctly, you will know it is not under the lamp skirt. I think it is a clever cache.

 

As said about IMO.

[Mr.Yuck]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

The name says "Revenge of the LPC" The description says simply "Little Purple Cache".

 

If you read the page, interpret it correctly, you will know it is not under the lamp skirt. I think it is a clever cache.

 

As said about IMO.

 

Um, this whole thread is deceiving. The cache page (and it sounds like even the original name of the cache) "lied" about it being an LPC, and most of the original post is referencing that. The cache page (and name as far as I can tell) has been revised to it's current form, which I doubt anyone would have a problem with. Not a cleaver thread.

Edited June 25, 2010 by TheWhiteUrkel

[knowschad]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

The name says "Revenge of the LPC" The description says simply "Little Purple Cache".

 

If you read the page, interpret it correctly, you will know it is not under the lamp skirt. I think it is a clever cache.

 

As said about IMO.

 

and if you had read the entire thread and interpreted it correctly, you would have seen that the cache page was edited to say that only after "GOF's Sock Puppet" made that post.

[+42at42]

Why would anyone think to look on the tree when the title basically says it is an LPC? Such misdirection does not, in my opinion, equate to cleaver.

 

The name says "Revenge of the LPC" The description says simply "Little Purple Cache".

 

If you read the page, interpret it correctly, you will know it is not under the lamp skirt. I think it is a clever cache.

 

As said about IMO.

 

and if you had read the entire thread and interpreted it correctly, you would have seen that the cache page was edited to say that only after "GOF's Sock Puppet" made that post.

 

Guilty as charged

 

I got confused.

Edited June 25, 2010 by 42at42

[+dorqie]

Well I like it.

I would enjoy finding it.

Really? After wasting time possibly vandalizing a LP only to find it's not there?

 

My opinion is that a lot of cachers will pry things off the lamp post and possibly electrocute themselves for a cache that is not there

Very bad idea

 

Back to the "I am not responsible for people not reading the cache page" discussion that's been hashed up a few times...