Jump to content

Micro Caches


mad007

Recommended Posts

I've seen some pretty clever micros that were all sneaky little urban cammo jobs. I don't want to give anything away but these are in locations where a regular cache would get muggled. I showed one to a coworker of mine and she was shocked because she's passed by it every day to and from her bus stop and never knew it was there.

 

I've also seen guardrails and the sign post ones. The one that was a real headscratcher was a film canister sitting on a guardrail. I strongly suspect that one won't last very long.

Link to comment

Most of those I've hidden are Micros. But I enjoy finding the other sizes for the possibility of Travel Bugs or perhaps a trinket that appeals to me. I'm glad there's variety. Most of us appreciate originality. I try to always have a few youth-oriented items to toss into a cache where such would be appropriate. This pursuit suits me just fine because I don't have to fit into any stereotype. Those who don't agree with my outlook, legion though they be, do not necessarily affect my enjoyment.

Link to comment

Emergence is the key word, indicating mico's were not part of the original geocaching sport. Very well stated ! Further, the people who won't take the time to create a decent cache likely do not take

the time to get permission to place them. To me, micro's defeat the original idea of geocaching. If I really

disliked them that much, I would hunt them, then check with the property owner or manager to see if they have permission to be there. If not, post it. I'll bet 90 percent of them are placed without permission. About 40% of the caches returned in a query of my area were micro's and I know for a fact that some were placed without permission. It seems when someone is willing to invest some time and thought in a nice cache, they value it enough to get permission. Mico's are a quick and dirty solution for those who just want numbers or or are not willing to put a little thought and work into a cache. I have been logging some of them and have to say they are not much fun for me. Not having permission is a real issue when property owners and others see people messing about and don't know why they are there. I live in a rural area and when I see someone lurking about on my property and I don't know them or know why they are there, I put some extra magazines on my belt and turn on the video recorder. Few people know about geocaching and everyone is aware of the rising number of home invasions. At some point Geocaching.com and the community is going to have to step up to the bat and address this issue. In my opinion they should create and enforce strict guidelines (container size, type) for a cache and eliminate micros. This may cause a little slump in the bottom line, but the consequences of not doing it will be far worse in the long run.

Why eliminate micro's ? Because they promote and encourage the placement of caches without permission.

If you doubt this, do some research in your area... check for yourself. MOST micros are placed without

permission and FEW larger more traditional caches are placed without permission.

 

I don't see how you can assume this is true. A lot of people place micros in urban areas *with* permission because they don't want *muggles* to find them. It may not have anything to do with hiding them from the property owner at all. Micros are often convenient for urban or hidden in plain site hides because muggles are less likely to spot them. I would rather not make assumptions that could possibly anger other cachers or property owners personally.

 

I agree that not having permission is an issue, but you really can't assume. I really don't think they promote hiding without permission. I've found a fair number of regulars in my day that turned out to be on private property with no permission.

 

But as I've said many times, I'm someone who caches for the location and the hunt rather than the container, so I don't really have a dog in this fight. I don't mind finding micros or nanos, or regulars or smalls, or anything in between.

Link to comment
I agree that not having permission is an issue, but you really can't assume.

I think some assumptions along those lines might bear fruit. Schmoozing at events has long been my favorite part of this little hobby. I'll talk to anyone and everyone at events, for hours at a time, about the darndest things. One topic I love to discuss is permission, as applied to urban micros. A question I've asked a gazillion times is, "Who did you ask for permission for your (insert cache name here) hide?". To date, every single one, without even one exception, has told me words to the effect of, "No one". While I'm certain there are a few urban micros for which permission has been obtained, they appear to be the exception.

 

The most common excuse I've heard is worded to the effect of, "It's a parking lot. I don't need permission". And actually, that may be a valid excuse. The guidelines only require adequate permission, without really explaining what that means. If I am allowed to be in a parking lot, and geocaching is a lawful activity unless specifically prohibited, (the basic English Rule of Law), wouldn't it be legal to cache in that parking lot? Both as a hider and a seeker? I don't have that answer.

 

What I do have is what is posted in the tips on hiding a geocache section of the website:

"If you place a cache on private land, you must ask permission before hiding your cache."

That seems pretty straight forward to me. Parking lots are private land. Going by that statement, it would appear that Groundspeak is in favor of getting explicit permission before hiding a cache in a parking lot, yet the guidelines utilize much softer language, requiring only adequate permission. Personally, I'd like to see the guidelines updated to reflect the principles espoused in the tips section, as I honestly believe it would lead to a reduction in the problems inherent with such hides. While it's no guarantee, I believe that having the property managers aware of a parking lot cache's existence would, at least somewhat, help dispel the type of alarms raised when Joe Public finds a film can under a lamp post and panics.

Link to comment

We love them all. We like micros b/c there is more of a challenge!!!

 

I find that most micros present very little challenge. They are either on the guard rail, in the street sign in the space between the sign and the post, in the knothole of the tree, or in the base of the lamp post. That accounts for roughly 92.7 percent of them.

I agree, how many times can you go from parking lot to parking lot for the same type of cache-- the camo'ed 35mm zip-tied to a tree before it gets really boring?! Or the magnetic nano stuck in the park bench. The cache has to offer some effort on our part to go out exploring new areas and trails. If it's all about the numbers, then go for it, but for us, the experience of hiking in the woods on a new trail is what we're about.

Link to comment

I think some assumptions along those lines might bear fruit.

 

I certainly agree that this may be the case, and permission is one of the issues of geocaching that I feel most strongly about, but I still won't just assume that someone didn't get permission. I will, however, ask them if there is evidence that permission has not been granted. I'm certainly not afraid of doing that. Since it does appear that you *do* ask folks, I admit that I'm not surprised that folks answered that they didn't get permission.

 

However, I don't think that people not getting permission is limited to micros... that was my point.

 

I do agree with you 100% that permission is important. If it's on private property, go and ask the owner/manager. They may say no, but that's life.

 

Even if the amount of folks not getting permission is what happens most often, I still won't assume outright that just because a cache is a micro the person didn't get permission.

 

I applaud you for actually talking to others about permission issues at events. I think that's really great!

Link to comment
However, I don't think that people not getting permission is limited to micros... that was my point.

Agreed. It's really about location. Micros catch the lion's share of the angst due to the fact that most parking lot landscaping only lends itself to those caches at the smallest end of the scale. Chances are just as great that a small, or a regular, hidden in a business parking lot, won't have explicit permission to be there.

 

I applaud you for actually talking to others about permission issues at events.

Blabbing mindlessly, droning on and on about this little hobby, is an ingrained part of my personality. I'll talk the ears off a mule, so long as the conversation includes Garmins, ammo cans, etc. Should you ever find yourself on this corner of our nation, look me up at an event. Bring duct tape. It's the only sure fire way to shut me up! :)

Link to comment
However, I don't think that people not getting permission is limited to micros... that was my point.

Agreed. It's really about location.

 

Yes!! That's really what it boils down to. I could see then how someone might think micros would cause the problem, since those locations often only have room for micros due to stealth issues, availability of hiding spots, etc. Although I've seen a lot of micros in places where larger containers would fit. Some of my own hides admittedly were those, but I changed out the containers for larger ones.

 

Another paradoxical aspect of myself perhaps; although I don't mind finding micros, I have decided to either swap out as many of my own micro hides with larger containers, or archive the micros altogether because I feel that larger containers appeal to a larger audience of cachers. The only ones I'm planning on keeping are my urban historical walking tour series, which is quite popular and interesting, and there isn't room for anything larger than micros at those sites.

 

Anyhoo...

 

Blabbing mindlessly, droning on and on about this little hobby, is an ingrained part of my personality. I'll talk the ears off a mule, so long as the conversation includes Garmins, ammo cans, etc. Should you ever find yourself on this corner of our nation, look me up at an event. Bring duct tape. It's the only sure fire way to shut me up! :P

 

Geochat is the BEST part about events, I think!!

Link to comment

We love them all. We like micros b/c there is more of a challenge!!!

 

I find that most micros present very little challenge. They are either on the guard rail, in the street sign in the space between the sign and the post, in the knothole of the tree, or in the base of the lamp post. That accounts for roughly 92.7 percent of them.

I agree, how many times can you go from parking lot to parking lot for the same type of cache-- the camo'ed 35mm zip-tied to a tree before it gets really boring?! Or the magnetic nano stuck in the park bench. The cache has to offer some effort on our part to go out exploring new areas and trails. If it's all about the numbers, then go for it, but for us, the experience of hiking in the woods on a new trail is what we're about.

Regarding the bolded bit, if the experience of hiking in teh woods is truly what it is all about to you, why does it matter what size the cache is? For that matter, why does there even need to be a cache? Just go take a hike.
Link to comment

I agree, how many times can you go from parking lot to parking lot for the same type of cache-- the camo'ed 35mm zip-tied to a tree before it gets really boring?! Or the magnetic nano stuck in the park bench. The cache has to offer some effort on our part to go out exploring new areas and trails. If it's all about the numbers, then go for it, but for us, the experience of hiking in the woods on a new trail is what we're about.

Regarding the bolded bit, if the experience of hiking in teh woods is truly what it is all about to you, why does it matter what size the cache is? For that matter, why does there even need to be a cache? Just go take a hike.

Of course if the experience you are after is going to the mall, parking far away from the entrance near a light pole, and lifting up the skirt to see what is there, why does there even need to be a cache? Just drive from parking lot to parking lot and lift up lamp post skirts. :P

 

In the interest of complete honesty, when I hike I check every suspicious pile of rocks, sticks, or leaves and look under any bush large enough to conceal an ammo can. However, I do not check every pine tree to see if there is a fake pinecone hiding a bison tube.

Link to comment

I agree, how many times can you go from parking lot to parking lot for the same type of cache-- the camo'ed 35mm zip-tied to a tree before it gets really boring?! Or the magnetic nano stuck in the park bench. The cache has to offer some effort on our part to go out exploring new areas and trails. If it's all about the numbers, then go for it, but for us, the experience of hiking in the woods on a new trail is what we're about.

Regarding the bolded bit, if the experience of hiking in teh woods is truly what it is all about to you, why does it matter what size the cache is? For that matter, why does there even need to be a cache? Just go take a hike.

Of course if the experience you are after is going to the mall, parking far away from the entrance near a light pole, and lifting up the skirt to see what is there, why does there even need to be a cache? Just drive from parking lot to parking lot and lift up lamp post skirts. :P

The act of lifting up lamp post skirts is not the 'thing', for me.

 

The thing is finding something that is hidden out in the world yet most people are completely unaware of it. Other 'things' that draw me to the game is an excuse to get off the couch and to get away from most of life's pressures, if only for a little while.

Link to comment

Do we really need another discussion on this matter?

 

Why can't we each find and hide the caches we want, for the reasons we want, and leave the rest for those who do want them? This game is so different for each cacher, it's difficult to please everyone.

 

Just go out and have fun!

 

Yes. Because we needed a teenaged kid from Austrailia to start a "hate all micros" thread, to perpetuate the myth that there are tens of thousands of people out there who hate all micros. :P

Link to comment

 

Of course if the experience you are after is going to the mall, parking far away from the entrance near a light pole, and lifting up the skirt to see what is there, why does there even need to be a cache? Just drive from parking lot to parking lot and lift up lamp post skirts. :(

 

 

:anicute::)

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

We love them all. We like micros b/c there is more of a challenge!!!

 

I find that most micros present very little challenge. They are either on the guard rail, in the street sign in the space between the sign and the post, in the knothole of the tree, or in the base of the lamp post. That accounts for roughly 92.7 percent of them.

I agree, how many times can you go from parking lot to parking lot for the same type of cache-- the camo'ed 35mm zip-tied to a tree before it gets really boring?! Or the magnetic nano stuck in the park bench. The cache has to offer some effort on our part to go out exploring new areas and trails. If it's all about the numbers, then go for it, but for us, the experience of hiking in the woods on a new trail is what we're about.

Regarding the bolded bit, if the experience of hiking in teh woods is truly what it is all about to you, why does it matter what size the cache is? For that matter, why does there even need to be a cache? Just go take a hike.

 

Also, not everyone *can* hike in the woods on trails. Admittedly, that's my favorite type of cache as well, and in that case, I agree with sbell; it's not about the container in that case, it's about the trail. Some people cache in urban places on paved sidewalks because they have mobility limitations, not necessarily a numbers fascination. When I started caching, I couldn't even walk a block. I was glad for some of those micros in urban parks.

Link to comment

I'm just in it for the views.

parking_lot.jpg

 

:anicute::):( HILARIOUS. I suppose if you are into cars, it's a good view.

 

Actually, when I was in college, I did a sociology report about parking lot behavior relative to the type of car and the person driving. I handed out surveys, did some in the field observation. It was actually quite interesting.

Link to comment

Since I live in a cache-rich urban area (1800+ within 10 miles of my home coordinates), if it wasn't for micros, the number of caches will decrease greatly due to the urban environment. There is a really nice mix of micro caches, too. Puzzles, Spirit Quests, Multis, and difficulty ratings from 1 to 5 to keep things interesting. Fortunately, I am also surrounded by very nice city parks and metro parks, which can handle larger cache containers, so I can drop TBs and coins when needed.

Link to comment

:D am not happy about the emergence of these pathetic mini caches - why bother at all.

 

What I'm not happy about is *WHY* they are becoming popular: because regular caches keep getting muggled! Seems a lot popular sites get raided for their contents. Now that's a separate rant: the number of cheap broken toys that turn up as swag. :)

 

I agree with others that have posted to the effect that it's the find that's the challenge, not the trade. Yeah, I still carry some good stuff, mostly creatively designed key carabiners and key fobs, but mostly I just sign the lag and leave a calling card. I keep the swag for the odd Travel Bug that grabs my interest. That is worth swapping for.

 

BTW, while in Des Moines on business, I found a huge difference in what they call a micro and what we call a micro in my area. Here, anything the size of a 35mm film can or small pill bottle is considered a micro. There, I found some Bison tubes with a rolled up log sheet, and two that were actually smaller than the magnet used to attach them, classed as a micro. I'd hate to see what they call a nano! This is not a rant, but more like a comment on accents: they may be regionally different. Major point is I HAD FUN FUNDING THEM! I got to see someplace I never otherwise would have.

 

If tradin' swag is your thing, I won't knock it, but don't stomp on my Joy of the Hunt and Find!

Link to comment

:D am not happy about the emergence of these pathetic mini caches - why bother at all.

 

I couldn't agree more, especially when they are in the middle of the woods....what is the point?

 

I agree. Especially if there's no creativity involved, e.g. just a film canister in the roots of a tree. To top things off, that micro ends up claiming a .1 mile radius. It's especially irksome when a CO claims a whole small woodlot with 2 of these micros at either end, preventing anyone with a larger cache from planting, sometimes for many years.

Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D
Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.

So how exactly does this force you to look for Micro or Small containers?

Are you saying I should also filter out small containers?

Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D
Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.

So how exactly does this force you to look for Micro or Small containers?

 

If I filter micro caches out of my PQs and someone has labeled their film can as a small they have used deception to get their cache on my list. Until I find the cache I have no way to know that I am looking for something other than what the CO has stated. Usually this is due to a mistake and not deception, but it does happen that COs sometimes lie. Why I can't fathom.

Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D
Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.
So how exactly does this force you to look for Micro or Small containers?
Are you saying I should also filter out small containers?

I'm not saying you should or shouldn't do anything. Sianyde correctly stated that nobody HAD to do that type of cache, and you said it wasn't true. So that means to me that you feel you HAVE to do that type of cache. Sounded like forcing to me so I thought I'd ask.

 

If someone hates micros enough to want to completely avoid them, they can filter out Micros and Smalls and have more Regular sized caches then they'll EVER be able to find. They can cache completely Micro free. It's just that easy.

Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D
Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.
So how exactly does this force you to look for Micro or Small containers?
If I filter micro caches out of my PQs and someone has labeled their film can as a small they have used deception to get their cache on my list. Until I find the cache I have no way to know that I am looking for something other than what the CO has stated. Usually this is due to a mistake and not deception, but it does happen that COs sometimes lie. Why I can't fathom.

But knowing that this practice goes on above the level that you find acceptable, you can remove Small from your PQs as well and be Micro free. Perhaps you could read logs of the Small caches to see if anyone mentioned the container actually being a Micro before finding them. Or you could quit caching all together.

 

Either way, the statement made by sianyde is correct, "no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to".

Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D

 

Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.

I've heard of people doing that on purpose. Just list the size correctly and let people decide if they want to do it or not.

Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D
Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.
So how exactly does this force you to look for Micro or Small containers?
Are you saying I should also filter out small containers?

I'm not saying you should or shouldn't do anything. Sianyde correctly stated that nobody HAD to do that type of cache, and you said it wasn't true. So that means to me that you feel you HAVE to do that type of cache. Sounded like forcing to me so I thought I'd ask.

Is there a way to know ahead of time if a CO has inadvertently or deliberately posted a micro as a small? No. You actually HAVE to visit the cache to find this out - which wastes time, wear/tear on the car and gas money.

 

Your suggestion is a 'chainsaw' kind of solution. Quoting briansnat here: "...like using a chainsaw to prune a rose bush."

Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D

 

Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.

I've heard of people doing that on purpose. Just list the size correctly and let people decide if they want to do it or not.

I don't think this primarily due to cache owners trying to dupe people into finding their micros. I think most of the misclassification of cache size is due to people who haven't read the guidelines. The problem begins with nanos. Since there isn't a nano category some people view what are commonly called nanos as micro caches. Traditional micros, especially those that can hole small coins and other small swag are viewed as small. Caches that are small per the guidelines then get inflated to regulars, and sometimes regular caches get listed as a large. Nobody is trying to dupe anyone, they just have their own definition of size because they haven't read the guidelines. I've always viewed size, along with terrain and difficulty, as rough estimates due to the fact that cache owners have different interpretations. I even recall finding two caches by the same owner hidden on the same trail with the same kind of container; one was listed as small and the other a regular.

 

Because of this, Mushtang's or sbell111's methods of filtering out micros so you won't have to find any micros is an imperfect solution. The best you can do is reduce the number of caches you don't want to find compared to those you do. Accept the fact there is no perfect solution for finding only the cache you approve of. Have fun when you find those caches you like and try to have fun when you find a cache you don't like as much. If you're not having fun, stop looking for that cache and move to the next one. If you've filtered out micros the chances are the next cache will be more your size.

Link to comment

I agree with others that have posted to the effect that it's the find that's the challenge, not the trade. Yeah, I still carry some good stuff, mostly creatively designed key carabiners and key fobs, but mostly I just sign the lag and leave a calling card. I keep the swag for the odd Travel Bug that grabs my interest. That is worth swapping for.

...

BTW, while in Des Moines on business, I found a huge difference in what they call a micro and what we call a micro in my area. Here, anything the size of a 35mm film can or small pill bottle is considered a micro. There, I found some Bison tubes with a rolled up log sheet, and two that were actually smaller than the magnet used to attach them, classed as a micro. I'd hate to see what they call a nano! This is not a rant, but more like a comment on accents: they may be regionally different. Major point is I HAD FUN FUNDING THEM! I got to see someplace I never otherwise would have.

 

A couple of things... you don't have to leave anything in trade for TBs, and there is no nano classification as of yet, which is probably why those teeny caches were classified as micro.

 

Just FYI

Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D
Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.
So how exactly does this force you to look for Micro or Small containers?
Are you saying I should also filter out small containers?
I'm not saying you should or shouldn't do anything. Sianyde correctly stated that nobody HAD to do that type of cache, and you said it wasn't true. So that means to me that you feel you HAVE to do that type of cache. Sounded like forcing to me so I thought I'd ask.
Is there a way to know ahead of time if a CO has inadvertently or deliberately posted a micro as a small? No. You actually HAVE to visit the cache to find this out - which wastes time, wear/tear on the car and gas money.
Agreed, which is why I suggested that to avoid them you could also remove Small caches. The only way you could make your point, again, is to have removed the part of my post where I mentioned this. So just to be sure, I'll post it again.

 

"If someone hates micros enough to want to completely avoid them, they can filter out Micros and Smalls and have more Regular sized caches then they'll EVER be able to find. They can cache completely Micro free. It's just that easy."

 

Your suggestion is a 'chainsaw' kind of solution. Quoting briansnat here: "...like using a chainsaw to prune a rose bush."
If you want to get rid of the roses and leave the main part of the bush, then a chainsaw is a good way to do it. No?

 

If someone wants to completely eliminate Mirco caches, then using a PQ and filtering out Micro and Small is a good way to do this. No? You eliminate what you don't want, and you're left with more Regular caches than you ever have the time to find. What's not to like?

Link to comment

:D am not happy about the emergence of these pathetic mini caches - why bother at all.

 

I couldn't agree more, especially when they are in the middle of the woods....what is the point?

 

I agree. Especially if there's no creativity involved, e.g. just a film canister in the roots of a tree. To top things off, that micro ends up claiming a .1 mile radius. It's especially irksome when a CO claims a whole small woodlot with 2 of these micros at either end, preventing anyone with a larger cache from planting, sometimes for many years.

I disagree. That cache would please me just as if it were a ammo can in the roots of the tree.
Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D

 

Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.

I've heard of people doing that on purpose. Just list the size correctly and let people decide if they want to do it or not.

I've heard of that, also. Of course, the only place I've heard of it is in these forums where people are demanding that this problem is running rampant. In my opinion, it is much more likely that some micros are accidently mis-sized and that the same old rabblers are assuming that they know everyone else's motivations, again.

Link to comment
Is there a way to know ahead of time if a CO has inadvertently or deliberately posted a micro as a small? No. You actually HAVE to visit the cache to find this out - which wastes time, wear/tear on the car and gas money.
That's not exactly true. A few methods to discover that a small might actually be micro are read the description and logs, ask a previous finder, and check the map. The third suggestion obviously isn't a perfect solution, but it will may raise your suspicion enough that someone like you may decide to skip the cache, at least until you get more definitive information. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D

 

Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.

I've heard of people doing that on purpose. Just list the size correctly and let people decide if they want to do it or not.

I don't think this primarily due to cache owners trying to dupe people into finding their micros. I think most of the misclassification of cache size is due to people who haven't read the guidelines. The problem begins with nanos. Since there isn't a nano category some people view what are commonly called nanos as micro caches. Traditional micros, especially those that can hole small coins and other small swag are viewed as small. Caches that are small per the guidelines then get inflated to regulars, and sometimes regular caches get listed as a large. Nobody is trying to dupe anyone, they just have their own definition of size because they haven't read the guidelines. I've always viewed size, along with terrain and difficulty, as rough estimates due to the fact that cache owners have different interpretations. I even recall finding two caches by the same owner hidden on the same trail with the same kind of container; one was listed as small and the other a regular.

 

Because of this, Mushtang's or sbell111's methods of filtering out micros so you won't have to find any micros is an imperfect solution. The best you can do is reduce the number of caches you don't want to find compared to those you do. Accept the fact there is no perfect solution for finding only the cache you approve of. Have fun when you find those caches you like and try to have fun when you find a cache you don't like as much. If you're not having fun, stop looking for that cache and move to the next one. If you've filtered out micros the chances are the next cache will be more your size.

Actually, I think that the 'easy peasy' method would handle this problem easily and peasily.
Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D
Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.
I've heard of people doing that on purpose. Just list the size correctly and let people decide if they want to do it or not.
I don't think this primarily due to cache owners trying to dupe people into finding their micros. I think most of the misclassification of cache size is due to people who haven't read the guidelines. ...
I know that that your theory is true of many caches, but I suspect that many of these micro-small errors are due to the fact that many people have no clue how big 'three ounces' is and don't feel the need to figure it out. After all, this silly game isn't brain surgery. No one is going to die if someone guesses a container's volume poorly. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

You can filter out micros if you choose. I won't go out of my way to find micros, but if I am in the area, I'll look for em.

 

But the truth is, the majority of finds are people finding urban micros. Easy to drive up, walk 40 feet, and sign.

 

The category I don't like on gc.com is the UNKNOWN size. They really need to get rid of it, many hiders are putting nanos and micros and listing them as unknown size.

 

The reviewers have a hard job as it is now, but perhaps when they see someone posting an unknown size, they can ask about the container and suggest the proper setting.

 

Anyhow, it's what you make of it. You can choose not to find urbans or micros or anything else.

Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D

 

Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.

I've heard of people doing that on purpose. Just list the size correctly and let people decide if they want to do it or not.

I've heard of that, also. Of course, the only place I've heard of it is in these forums where people are demanding that this problem is running rampant. In my opinion, it is much more likely that some micros are accidently mis-sized and that the same old rabblers are assuming that they know everyone else's motivations, again.

I didn't say it was running rampant. I just said I've heard of it, which I have. A person I know does just this, and also underrates the difficulty. A nano in the woods attached non-magnetically to a tree and wrapped with a fake leaf is not a 1 difficulty. They do it to see what people's reactions will be, but the odd thing is that the majority of people don't say anything, so it often stays posted incorrectly for awhile. Eventually, though, someone will say the difficulty and size are wrong, and the owner will update the cache info "based on what others have said."

Edited by Skippermark
Link to comment

 

(Edited for brevity.)

 

Actually, I think that the 'easy peasy' method would handle this problem easily and peasily.

 

To be clear, you aren't suggesting that "easy peasy" eliminates micros listed as small are you? You're just saying that it probably gets rid of most of them, right? You're just agreeing with Toz, right?

I'm saying that a person could use the easy peasy method to get rid of all micros, whether they are listed as micro, small, or other.
Link to comment
... and the good part is no one HAS to do that type of cache if he doesn't want to :D
Not quite true. Many COs either on-purpose or inadvertently dupe people into finding their micros by listing them as small.
I've heard of people doing that on purpose. Just list the size correctly and let people decide if they want to do it or not.
I've heard of that, also. Of course, the only place I've heard of it is in these forums where people are demanding that this problem is running rampant. In my opinion, it is much more likely that some micros are accidently mis-sized and that the same old rabblers are assuming that they know everyone else's motivations, again.
I didn't say it was running rampant.
I never suggested that you did say this.
I just said I've heard of it, which I have. A person I know does just this, and also underrates the difficulty. A nano in the woods attached non-magnetically to a tree and wrapped with a fake leaf is not a 1 difficulty. They do it to see what people's reactions will be, but the odd thing is that the majority of people don't say anything, so it often stays posted incorrectly for awhile. Eventually, though, someone will say the difficulty and size are wrong, and the owner will update the cache info "based on what others have said."

That gets back to my previous point that many of these errors are not an intentional deception but either an error of understanding where the size breaks truly are or a misunderstanding as to how large '3 ounces' is.
Link to comment

 

(Edited for brevity.)

 

Actually, I think that the 'easy peasy' method would handle this problem easily and peasily.

 

To be clear, you aren't suggesting that "easy peasy" eliminates micros listed as small are you? You're just saying that it probably gets rid of most of them, right? You're just agreeing with Toz, right?

I'm saying that a person could use the easy peasy method to get rid of all micros, whether they are listed as micro, small, or other.

 

Would that be by filtering out all the size small and size other?

Link to comment

I'm saying that a person could use the easy peasy method to get rid of all micros, whether they are listed as micro, small, or other.

 

That penalizes the COs that plant nice smalls and correctly list them.

 

I think I'll stick with my current method - filter out micros and unknowns/others; any time I find a micro that is incorrectly listed as a small, I will note it in the log and include the guidelines definitions of a micro and a small.

Link to comment

We love them all. We like micros b/c there is more of a challenge!!!

 

I find that most micros present very little challenge. They are either on the guard rail, in the street sign in the space between the sign and the post, in the knothole of the tree, or in the base of the lamp post. That accounts for roughly 92.7 percent of them.

 

Ahh man you just gave away all my micro cache locations :) now I got to go move them :D . Actually I do enjoy micros for lunch caches. It gives me a chance to forget about work and get outside. There are some lame ones for sure but I like the little nano containers and I have seen some really cool cache containers that were very creative. One container was made of bark, another looked as if it was part of the machinery it was attached to. You never know what you might find. Geocaching.com makes it easy for all to search for the caches they like and avoid the ones they don't. As for not listing caches correctly, I haven't run across any that have been wrong in my neck of the woods. Sad that some can't list a cache correctly.

 

Happy Hunting,

Greenbacks :D

Link to comment

You say you don't care for micros in parking lots, behind dumpsters, next to strip malls and other mundane places, so the hackneyed, stock answer is to filter out all micros. Never mind that eliminates many outstanding caches, including a good portion of the ones at historic sites that you find enjoyable. It still leaves plenty of caches for you to find you're told.

 

It's also imperfect because many geocachers are mislabeling nanos as "other". So filter out "other" we're advised. Yet the "other" category also includes many of the most creative caches.

 

Then it's noted that there is a trend toward listing micros as "small". So filter out "small" is the answer. Yet small caches are heavily represented in caches in nice parks, at scenic overlooks, along hiking trails, near waterfalls, inside mines and caves and other interesting areas. The kind you especially enjoy.

 

Now you're at the point where in order to weed out the lame micros, you are not only filtering out all micros, you need to filter out other and small caches too, and with them a significant portion of the kinds of caches you enjoy the most. And in many areas around 80 percent of all caches.

 

Using the scattergun approach indeed works - to a point. When you use a shotgun to kill the fly in your kitchen the fly is dead, but the collateral damage becomes unacceptable.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I've had some luck filtering my caches doing the long method of reading the cache description, looking at it on a map and then deciding if it looks like some place I want to visit and if there was some care put into the cache description. Those with more care, I find, yield better caches.

 

It's time consuming but I figure I have such limited time to actually geocache that when I do it I want to make it worth it. And it's not foolproof. Occasionally a bad micro makes it through. But such is life.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...