Cache Size: Not Chosen vs Other

[+JL_HSTRE]

Besides the sizes Micro, Small, Regular, and Large (and the forthcoming Nano) there are also two other sizes you can chose for a cache: Other ("?") and Not Chosen ("X"). I have seen these last two sizes used the following ways:

• Earthcaches and Events.
  
• Multi-caches where some stages did not have a container: Virtual stages giving information necessary to solve another stage, stages that are just coordinates affixed to an object with no actual container, etc.
  
• Multi-caches where the stages are not all the same size; the actual containers are listed in the cache description.
  
• Caches placed in a host object (ex: nano/micro drilled into a piece of wood)
  
• Caches with unusual containers (ex: fake rocks/logs/branches, fake utility boxes).
  
• COs intentionally hiding that a cache is a Nano or Micro to avoid it getting filtered out by people who dislike Nanos/Micros
  
• Cachers who just want to make a hide more difficult by not telling you what you're searching for.
  

 

But while these are all the ways I have seen them used, Other and Not Chosen seem to be used interchangeably and I didn't see an explanation of when they are appropriate in the guidelines (maybe I missed it?).

 

So when should Other be used, when should Not Chosen be used, and when are either/both used when they shouldn't be?

[medoug]

Besides the sizes Micro, Small, Regular, and Large (and the forthcoming Nano) there are also two other sizes you can chose for a cache: Other ("?") and Not Chosen ("X").

 

"Other (?)" is a cache type, not a cache size. It is often used for puzzle caches where the cache is not located at the posted coordinates.

[+simpjkee]

Other is a cache size option.

 

I would use "other" if I was talking about the cache size in the description or was cool with publicly sharing that the size doesn't fit a particular category. I would choose "not chosen" if I didn't anyone to know anything about the size of the cache.

[Clan Riffster]

So when should Other be used, when should Not Chosen be used...

My thoughts on this are, (judging by local cache pages), not the norm. I don't think either size should be used.

Maybe for caches without a container, as you mentioned? I dunno. I just checked the 12 CITOs/events I hosted and I see I chose one of those options 4 times. I guess I'm not very consistent. For multis, I think the size posted should reflect the final. In my book, a nano affixed to a Sherman tank, or stuck in a log is still a nano. Attaching a container to a larger object doesn't change the size of the container. As to unusual containers, I figure the size guidelines still apply. An itty-bitty fake rock would be a micro, a fake boulder, (assuming an equally large cavity), would be a large.

Yes, I know my thoughts don't make a whole lot of sense, but they're mine!

[+lemon16]

I think that caches placed with a host object, or containers with unusual dimensions should be listed as "Other". Nanos should NOT be listed as "Other", but "Micro" until the new "Nano" size is implemented.

"Not Chosen", for me, is self-explanatory: the CO didn't choose a size (They either don't want you to know the size or simply forgot to choose a size.)

For multis, the size listed should be the size of the final. If the CO desires, he/she can list the size of each stage in the description.

I also think that Earthcaches and Events should be listed as "Virtual", because they have no physical container. This is not currently an option, so I would choose "Not Chosen" for now. (I see you suggested this in the Feedback forum - 1 vote from me!)

[+JL_HSTRE]

I also think that Earthcaches and Events should be listed as "Virtual", because they have no physical container. This is not currently an option, so I would choose "Not Chosen" for now. (I see you suggested this in the Feedback forum - 1 vote from me!)

 

Yes, I did.

[AZcachemeister]

Not Chosen means the owner is stupid, and can't tell how big the container is.

 

Other is supposed to mean the container is unusually large, or surprisingly tiny, but typically ends up meaning the same as Not Chosen.

[+sbell111]

Not Chosen means the owner is stupid, andcan't tell how big the container is.

 

Other is supposed to mean the container is unusually large, or surprisingly tiny, but typically ends up meaning the same as Not Chosen.

Actually, 'other' should never be used since there is no container that is too large or too small to fall into the remaining categories.

 

'Not Chosen', of course, could be selected for the reasons previously listed by the OP. It simply means that the cache owner elected not to choose a category, for whatever reason.

Edited January 18, 2011 by sbell111

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Not Chosen means the owner is stupid, andcan't tell how big the container is.

 

Other is supposed to mean the container is unusually large, or surprisingly tiny, but typically ends up meaning the same as Not Chosen.

Actually, 'other' should never be used since there is no container that is too large or too small to fall into the remaining categories.

 

'Not Chosen', of course, could be selected for the reasons previously listed by the OP. It simply means that the cache owner elected not to choose a category, for whatever reason.

Actually, "Other" fits better with mixed-size containers such as a statue with a compartment. The statue may be regular or large sized but the compartment is small or micro sized. You can only fit a log in the container, but the container itself doesn't qualify as a regular or large.

 

"Not chosen" is for owners that don't want to give you a hint on the size.

[+GeoGeeBee]

Actually, 'other' should never be used since there is no container that is too large or too small to fall into the remaining categories.

 

Let's say, hypothetically speaking, that I have a five foot tall concrete statue of St. Francis of Assisi. I drill a small hole in the back of his neck and epoxy a bison tube into that hole. Then I drag this monstrosity several miles into the woods and leave it standing next to a trail.

 

What shall I list as the size? Large seems obvious, since it is, after all, five feet tall. But it also seems obviously wrong, as the container only has room for a log. So it's a micro, right? Because there's only room for a log. But wait, it's FIVE FEET TALL. So micro can't be right.

 

When I finally get around to doing this, I'm going to list it as 'other.' It's the only option that makes any sense at all.

Edited January 18, 2011 by GeoGeeBee

[+sbell111]

Actually, 'other' should never be used since there is no container that is too large or too small to fall into the remaining categories.

 

'Not Chosen', of course, could be selected for the reasons previously listed by the OP. It simply means that the cache owner elected not to choose a category, for whatever reason.

 

Let's say, hypothetically speaking, that I have a five foot tall concrete statue of St. Francis of Assisi. I drill a small hole in the back of his neck and epoxy a bison tube into that hole. Then I drag this monstrosity several miles into the woods and leave it standing next to a trail.

 

What shall I list as the size? Large seems obvious, since it is, after all, five feet tall. But it also seems obviously wrong, as the container only has room for a log. So it's a micro, right? Because there's only room for a log. But wait, it's FIVE FEET TALL. So micro can't be right.

 

When I finally get around to doing this, I'm going to list it as 'other.' It's the only option that makes any sense at all.

The container is a bison tube, so I would choose 'micro'. Alternatively, I might choose 'not chosen', as explained in the post that you quoted (even though you did edit that part out). Edited January 18, 2011 by sbell111

[+Castle Mischief]

"Not chosen" in practice seems to mean "I didn't take the time to click a size that offers you any idea of what you're looking for when I hid my micro".

 

"Other" seems to indicate "I thought it would be really sneaky of me to list my size as "other" to TOTALLY BLOW YOUR MIND when I hid my micro."

 

 

I've found caches where it made sense to not give away the actual size and where either size could be understood or logically explained. These are the minority.

[+kpanko]

Let's say, hypothetically speaking, that I have a five foot tall concrete statue of St. Francis of Assisi. I drill a small hole in the back of his neck and epoxy a bison tube into that hole. Then I drag this monstrosity several miles into the woods and leave it standing next to a trail.

The container is a bison tube, so I would choose 'micro'.

Yes, if the container were all that ever mattered, it would be a micro size. But the typical micro cache is a small thing, like a matchstick holder. Some people filter micros out of their search query because they do not want to find a small thing. But a five foot tall statue is not a small thing! This is no pill bottle with camo tape, and it seems wrong to stick it in the same category.

 

Therefore, I think size "other" is fine to use for "unusual" hides.

 

This does raise some questions about leaving gigantic man-made objects in the woods ...

[+sbell111]

Let's say, hypothetically speaking, that I have a five foot tall concrete statue of St. Francis of Assisi. I drill a small hole in the back of his neck and epoxy a bison tube into that hole. Then I drag this monstrosity several miles into the woods and leave it standing next to a trail.

The container is a bison tube, so I would choose 'micro'.

Yes, if the container were all that ever mattered, it would be a micro size.

Well, the container is all that matters when considering it's size.

But the typical micro cache is a small thing, like a matchstick holder. Some people filter micros out of their search query because they do not want to find a small thing. But a five foot tall statue is not a small thing! This is no pill bottle with camo tape, and it seems wrong to stick it in the same category.

If he had stuck the hypothetical bison tube in the hole and did not secure it with glue, which size would you have chosen?

Therefore, I think size "other" is fine to use for "unusual" hides.

 

This does raise some questions about leaving gigantic man-made objects in the woods ...

Wow. You deleted the bit of my post that allowed for a cache owner to not use 'micro' in this instance and then argued like I never made that point. This makes twice in a row that someone has done this.

 

BTW, 'other' makes no sense since all sizes of everything in the entire universe fit neatly in the micro-large continuum. 'Not chosen' makes some sense for the scenario that GeoGeeBee proposed. That's why I included it in my previous post.

Edited January 18, 2011 by sbell111

[+kpanko]

Wow. You deleted the bit of my post that allowed for a cache owner to not use 'micro' in this instance and then argued like I never made that point. This makes twice in a row that someone has done this.

 

BTW, 'other' makes no sense since all sizes of everything in the entire universe fit neatly in the micro-large continuum. 'Not chosen' makes some sense for the scenario that GeoGeeBee proposed. That's why I included it in my previous post.

I was making my own point, not really arguing with yours.

 

But if you insist...

 

The conclusion that everything must be only micro/small/regular/large is firmly rooted in logic, but assumes that there will only be one container, and that only the size of the container that opens is the important size. I disagree with these assumptions, therefore, "other" is a reasonable choice in some cases.

 

Here is how I feel about it:

- Not Chosen: The cache owner does not want to say anything about the container.

- Other: The container is unusual in some way, and the owner wants you to know this.

[+niraD]

Actually, the largest cache I've found was listed as size "Other". I'm not sure why it wasn't listed as size "Large" since the owner made it clear that the container was very large in the cache description.

[+Avernar]

- Not Chosen: The cache owner does not want to say anything about the container.

One of my pet peeves is when the CO uses this as the sole way of making the find more difficult. Especially if it's a run of the mill hide.

 

I like it when it's used to "protect" an unusual cammo job or hide where knowing the size will spoil the fun.

 

- Other: The container is unusual in some way, and the owner wants you to know this.

Too many times I've seen this on mundane containers. Probably used because the container doesn't match the size description 100%: "It's not a film canister so it must be an Other."

[+lemon16]

Actually, the largest cache I've found was listed as size "Other". I'm not sure why it wasn't listed as size "Large" since the owner made it clear that the container was very large in the cache description.

 

The cache owner probably thought that the container was not "large", it is "extra large". Since there is no "extra large" size option, they listed it as "other" - much as some people consider nanos to be smaller than micros.

[Clan Riffster]

Yes, if the container were all that ever mattered, it would be a micro size

In this sense, I think the container is all that matters. Because of my quirky, entirely biased caching aesthetics, when I make a mental image of a cache, what I see is the container. The container is, by my personal interpretation, the cache. If I stick an ammo can to the underside of a bridge, I don't consider the bridge as part of the cache. When answering the cache size question, the bridge never comes into play. Only the container. The same is true, (for me), for a bison tube stuck in a statue. I consider the bison tube as the cache, and the statue as camo.

 

I should qualify that these are just my interpretations of how things should be done.

These statements do not imply that you should follow suit.

Hide, and list, your cache, however you see fit.

 

This does raise some questions about leaving gigantic man-made objects in the woods ...

There's a place near me that has, for sale, an eight foot tall, pink, concrete chicken statue.

If I could afford to buy it, and hire a helicopter to transport it, that baby would be way back in a swamp.

Maybe with an ammo can tucked up into it's backside?

Definitely not a bison tube.

[+WRASTRO]

Other and not chosen both mean I should make sure to read the cache description. Of course I always do that anyway. Either one typically means to me the container will be camoed in some way if it is not a nano. I do appreciate those who hide nano containers and properly list them as micros.

[+DonB]

Why not just make choosing a size mandatory? That way I know I'm not looking for a nano in the woods, which I normally would filter out.

[+Kit Fox]

I've noticed that most "other," and "not chosen" caches are nano sized micros. I once hid a bison capsule inside of a 30lb rock, and didn't think micro was an accurate description, and large would have made it a dead giveaway. I used "not chosen" for the size.

 

A while back, their was a thread about unscrupulous cache owners realized people were skipping their "nano-micro" hides, so they started mislabeling their micros as smalls.

[+Don_J]

Not Chosen means the owner is stupid, and can't tell how big the container is.

 

Or, it could mean that the owner is clever and won't tell you how big the container is.

[+briansnat]

I used "Other" for a cache I once owned where the log was glued to the back of a magnetic sheet and disguised as a sign. I think that would be a good use of other. I think GeoGeeBee's and Kit Fox's examples would also be a good use of "other" or "not chosen".

[+Don_J]

I have only not selected a cache size once, and every finder was very amused by my deception. A few have looked several times and not found the cache, even though it is in plain sight. It's because they have set their minds for what they are looking for. Big mistake.

 

"Micros in the Wild"

Edited January 20, 2011 by Don_J