Difficulty Due to Muggle Activity

[+SlickNickster]

So I'm curious as to what people think about increasing a cache's difficulty rating based on muggle activity. I've seen LPC's difficulty listed in the 1.5, 2 and 2.5 range due to being in a higher muggle visited parking lot... I don't believe any LPC should ever be over a 1 difficulty even if the pole itself is growing out of a muggles head (well maybe then it could be necessary). According to the Geocaching.com Glossary "Difficulty relates to the mental challenge of finding a cache." If Google Maps places the magic dot over a Light Pole, it doesn't take any more mental capacity to wait out the muggle eating his happy meal next to GZ in order to find that mystical film canister under the hood. I didn't rack my brain scheduling out my visit the next day or later that night to avoid the muggles. And on that note if we don't up the difficulty when a cache is harder to find in the pitch black of night then the reverse should also true during the day with all the muggles. End of rant, let me know what you think.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

Agree w/ your whole post. Upping the D for muggles is a silly as upping the T for criminals.

[+briansnat]

It doesn't make things any more difficult for me. I'm with you and Sharks n Beans.

[+mpilchfamily]

+3 on that. Muggles do not effect my caching nor should it affect others.

[+RoadRoach58]

Whole heartedly agree that a muggle factor should not up the difficulty to the finder. In fact, if that is what is making the cache difficult, I vote that Muggle Activity actually detract from the difficulty. Isn't this sort of like tying one to a Rottweiler's collar and saying it's in plain view, and raising the difficulty? Suppose I just brought a tazer with me to take care of the Rotty so I could get the cache? I don't think the dog's owner would realy appreciate that. Give me a 5 gallon snap-lid hidden under a stump on a hinged vault in an area that's got a heavy canopy any day. Now THAT was a great hide. Lamp post hides? Nah, I don't even worry about who sees me now. I'm out to get my numbers up then, these are easy to get to, they were put in a public place, so I don't care if the public sees it. I used to stress over being seen, but now, it's just bad luck if it gets destroyed. I don't care, another will be put back within days. The more conspicuous GZ is, the less care I take with not being seen. People should know what they're protecting or being USED for. Too many times, I've come across some that the establishment owners/managers did not know were there, and REALLY didn't want them there. NO WONDER the muggle factor was such a big deal. On the other hand, I take GREAT pains to avoid exposing one that was worth going after, i.e. an ammo can in a popular spot in a state park. But a stupid pill bottle with a soggy moldy log under a lamp skirt? Wow, be still my beating heart, here's a parking lot with 90 mushy logs I have to hurry to sign before I get seen. Right. And THEN, when I set an NM to say it Needs Maintenance, I'm the BAD GUY for not fixing it for the owner while they're out finding better caches? Huh?

Edited April 13, 2011 by RoadRoach58

[+KBLAST]

Hmm.. maybe I need to adjust one of mine. I upped it to 1.5 due to mugglocity, but maybe I shouldn't have. Anyway, there was once an urban cache in a town not to far from here where the difficulty was a four. I took a buddy of mine who was new to geocaching to the area to show him how tricky these can be. I pulled up, and sure enough, it was an LPC. Difficulty raised due to muggles. He looked at me after we sneakily removed and replaced the cache without anyone noticing, then said, "So I bet it would be bad if I just jumped up and ran off... like this!!!" And then he did just that. I of course had to run off after him. Sometimes a 4 difficulty should be a 5, and sometimes a 4 should be a 1. Anyway, thanks for giving me a reason to recount this fun story.

[+Harry Dolphin]

If the search is done right, it shouldn't be much of a problem

Hmm... The cache is in the gazebo right over the sleeping girl. You go over there. Point into the lake and scream: Look at that! Everyone's head turned, and I retrieved the cache.

Cache is in the sign post the lady is leaning against. Plop down my backpack right behind her heels. Rummage through the back pack, and palm the cache. Repeat to replace.

[+StarBrand]

Just a silly notion. Muggles don't make locating the cache harder in the least.

 

Protecting the cache yes (maybe). But there is no "p" rating.

[AZcachemeister]

Non-cachers (heathens) do not enter into my geocaching equation.

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

[Mr.Yuck]

Just a silly notion. Muggles don't make locating the cache harder in the least.

 

Protecting the cache yes (maybe). But there is no "p" rating.

 

Well, I don't do such caches, but I've seen this hundreds of times on cache pages, this "upping the difficulty due to the muggle factor" thing. But what I'd really like to hear is the opinion on this from the "filter out all 1/1 micros if you don't want to end up in a parking lot" crowd. But I'm guessing I'll probably hear crickets chirping.

[+myotis]

So I'm curious as to what people think about increasing a cache's difficulty rating based on muggle activity. I've seen LPC's difficulty listed in the 1.5, 2 and 2.5 range due to being in a higher muggle visited parking lot... I don't believe any LPC should ever be over a 1 difficulty even if the pole itself is growing out of a muggles head (well maybe then it could be necessary). According to the Geocaching.com Glossary "Difficulty relates to the mental challenge of finding a cache." If Google Maps places the magic dot over a Light Pole, it doesn't take any more mental capacity to wait out the muggle eating his happy meal next to GZ in order to find that mystical film canister under the hood. I didn't rack my brain scheduling out my visit the next day or later that night to avoid the muggles. And on that note if we don't up the difficulty when a cache is harder to find in the pitch black of night then the reverse should also true during the day with all the muggles. End of rant, let me know what you think.

 

I think it would bear more on the cache hider than the difficulity of the find. If there are muggle problems, it normally demostrates the cache hider did not use common sense to find a good place to hide a cache. Back in the day, we would find a nice place to search instead of tossing a cache anywhere it was possible to toss one.

 

One time I got frustrated with all the lampost caches-geez if you've seen one, you have seen them all. And any idiot can lift a lampost skrit. So I hid one in a lampost and put on the cache page that there was a decoy. So I had a container labeled "decoy" and hid the cache in the decoy.

[+TeamDadcubed]

Wow I didn't realize the heated opinions this topic instilled in GC folk. Good to know being a novice and all. I had already sworn off Nano hiding as I think they don't require much forethought, in many if not most cases. But to see the above posts tells me that that parking lot hide I had in mind really needs some attention to a detailed hide, and not the micro in the LPC (or is it lamp post skirt LPS?)

 

I have also sworn off electrical mimicery(sp?) as I am a father of 3 teens. They were little once and I know that if they saw dad with his fingers in a J-box it would only be a matter of time till... you know. As for all the other metal electrical boxes that dot our urban landscape... All it takes is ONE floating ground on a box and GC makes international news, in the worst way, when lil Wendy thought she had stumbled upon a cache and ZAP!!! Folks we're not talking 110v house voltage in there... try 10x 20x 100x that small zap you got from unplugging the vaccuum. Sorry, pushing the soap box way now.

 

Back on topic. Thanks for sharing your opinions. It helps me be a better cacher and hider as well as gives me lessons I don't want to have to learn first hand.

 

TC and GH

 

Dad of TeamDadcubed

[Dj Storm]

Raising the difficulty of a D1 cache due to muggle factor doesn't make sense.

However, if a cache is normally a difficulty 2.5, meaning you're looking forward to 10-30 minutes of searching, the muggle factor becomes relevant. In this case, my vote is for upping the difficulty.

[+RobDJr]

I'm gonna swim against the current here.

 

I don't mind when the D rating is raised for muggles. I might arrive at the location and know where the cache is within seconds, but still might have to spend time and make an effort to get at it without getting noticed. Sometimes that is part of the fun.

 

The rating isn't always simply about "knowing where the cache is hidden".

 

That said, I'm not really a fan of muggle-intense hides. If a hide gives me a muggle-induced migraine, I'll either walk away or decide that if the owner wanted to hide there, then whether or not the cache survives because I wasn't able to retrieve it without being spotted isn't my problem.

[+nittanycopa]

Should be based on how well it blends into its surroundings, not on muggles present.

 

I like a good, challenging urban hide, muggles and all. (Bring on the flames, purists...)

[+A & J Tooling]

If after ten minutes, muggle activity doesn't decrease, I leave it for another day. Don't raise dificulty because of muggles. I like to earn the difficult ones.

[+BaylorGrad]

I think I have once raised the difficulty for muggle activity once. It's a cache of mine that is located 3 feet below the window of an office. I don't care how little you care about muggles, if you're caught searching for this cache and the muggle inside sees you, they're probably going to have a word with you. Given that this uncomfortable situation is what almost every cacher wants to avoid, I rated my cache half a star higher than I would have otherwise (from a 2 to a 2.5 in this case).

 

So I think it matters, but it shouldn't be the defining factor of difficulty. Just something else to take into consideration, in my mind.

[Mr.Yuck]

Should be based on how well it blends into its surroundings, not on muggles present.

 

I like a good, challenging urban hide, muggles and all. (Bring on the flames, purists...)

 

Not enough information to flame you. Are we talking a cache placed without permission out back by the Wal-Mart loading dock in the employees smoking area? Or a micro at a War Memorial in a small City Park? Just a little insight into the average "purists" way of thinking.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

THIS

[+nittanycopa]

Should be based on how well it blends into its surroundings, not on muggles present.

 

I like a good, challenging urban hide, muggles and all. (Bring on the flames, purists...)

 

Not enough information to flame you. Are we talking a cache placed without permission out back by the Wal-Mart loading dock in the employees smoking area? Or a micro at a War Memorial in a small City Park? Just a little insight into the average "purists" way of thinking.

 

I'm talking about a cache hidden where there may be a high chance of someone seeing you looking for it. Maybe I should have substituted "purist" with "micro hater"...

 

A cache behind Wal-Mart? Usually just another guardrail / LPC cache that presents little challenge.

 

A black nano hidden on a large metal sculpture in a park. Why hello...

[knowschad]

If the search is done right, it shouldn't be much of a problem

Hmm... The cache is in the gazebo right over the sleeping girl. You go over there. Point into the lake and scream: Look at that! Everyone's head turned, and I retrieved the cache.

Cache is in the sign post the lady is leaning against. Plop down my backpack right behind her heels. Rummage through the back pack, and palm the cache. Repeat to replace.

 

That is why caching in groups of two or more is often a good idea. That way, one of them can create a diversion... maybe fake a heart attack or seisure or something, while the other one grabs the cache.

[+GeoGeeBee]

 

I'm talking about a cache hidden where there may be a high chance of someone seeing you looking for it.

 

In that case, I agree with AZcachemeister, who said:

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

 

Someone's signature says "stealth required" is a euphemism for "there shouldn't be a cache here." If my lack of stealth gets your no-permission cache archived, I won't feel bad about it.

[+nittanycopa]

 

I'm talking about a cache hidden where there may be a high chance of someone seeing you looking for it.

 

In that case, I agree with AZcachemeister, who said:

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

 

Someone's signature says "stealth required" is a euphemism for "there shouldn't be a cache here." If my lack of stealth gets your no-permission cache archived, I won't feel bad about it.

 

To each their own, I'll continue to enjoy finding them.

[+LukeTrocity]

If someone puts a cache outside a crack den, and the terrain is 4 I'm cool with that. Just won't be finding it.

[+Panther&Pine]

I think I have once raised the difficulty for muggle activity once. It's a cache of mine that is located 3 feet below the window of an office. I don't care how little you care about muggles, if you're caught searching for this cache and the muggle inside sees you, they're probably going to have a word with you. Given that this uncomfortable situation is what almost every cacher wants to avoid, I rated my cache half a star higher than I would have otherwise (from a 2 to a 2.5 in this case).

 

So I think it matters, but it shouldn't be the defining factor of difficulty. Just something else to take into consideration, in my mind.

Why put a cache there?

[Mr.Yuck]

I think I have once raised the difficulty for muggle activity once. It's a cache of mine that is located 3 feet below the window of an office. I don't care how little you care about muggles, if you're caught searching for this cache and the muggle inside sees you, they're probably going to have a word with you. Given that this uncomfortable situation is what almost every cacher wants to avoid, I rated my cache half a star higher than I would have otherwise (from a 2 to a 2.5 in this case).

 

So I think it matters, but it shouldn't be the defining factor of difficulty. Just something else to take into consideration, in my mind.

 

I think I see the one you're talking about. I don't see any "raised the difficulty due to the muggle factor" type language on the page, which I've probably seen over 100 times on cache pages. I see your others on campus too. I don't know man, it's just my opinion, but I'd probably go to ISU to pay homage to Larry Bird, but I probably wouldn't be too interested in looking for micros there, and "avoiding the student muggles".

 

A side note, a Baylor Grad. but a Grad student at ISU, where you from originally?

[Mr.Yuck]

Should be based on how well it blends into its surroundings, not on muggles present.

 

I like a good, challenging urban hide, muggles and all. (Bring on the flames, purists...)

 

Not enough information to flame you. Are we talking a cache placed without permission out back by the Wal-Mart loading dock in the employees smoking area? Or a micro at a War Memorial in a small City Park? Just a little insight into the average "purists" way of thinking.

 

I'm talking about a cache hidden where there may be a high chance of someone seeing you looking for it. Maybe I should have substituted "purist" with "micro hater"...

 

A cache behind Wal-Mart? Usually just another guardrail / LPC cache that presents little challenge.

 

A black nano hidden on a large metal sculpture in a park. Why hello...

 

A nano on a metal sculpture in the park? Not my first choice, but I'd probably show up. Do I think the difficulty should be raised if there's always a lot of people near this sculpture? No way.

[+BaylorGrad]

I think I have once raised the difficulty for muggle activity once. It's a cache of mine that is located 3 feet below the window of an office. I don't care how little you care about muggles, if you're caught searching for this cache and the muggle inside sees you, they're probably going to have a word with you. Given that this uncomfortable situation is what almost every cacher wants to avoid, I rated my cache half a star higher than I would have otherwise (from a 2 to a 2.5 in this case).

 

So I think it matters, but it shouldn't be the defining factor of difficulty. Just something else to take into consideration, in my mind.

 

I think I see the one you're talking about. I don't see any "raised the difficulty due to the muggle factor" type language on the page, which I've probably seen over 100 times on cache pages. I see your others on campus too. I don't know man, it's just my opinion, but I'd probably go to ISU to pay homage to Larry Bird, but I probably wouldn't be too interested in looking for micros there, and "avoiding the student muggles".

 

A side note, a Baylor Grad. but a Grad student at ISU, where you from originally?

 

I'll reply to your question in a private message, but I wanted to address the comment above yours, on my Geocache placed underneath an office window. My theory for Geocaching is I want to bring people somewhere nice. Beneath an office window isn't necessary a *nice* place, but notice the title of my cache: ISU Chipmunk Garden. During the warmer months, I have seen dozens of chipmunks in the area, and this is my motivation for placing a cache here. I just also enjoy the extra challenge of a sneaky cache placement.

 

Also--you might not like urban campus micros, but clearly many of the students on campus do (just look at the number of finds in such a short amount of time!). Many students on the ISU campus don't have cars, so I like placing caches that they can conveniently walk to.

[+BlueDeuce]

Should be based on how well it blends into its surroundings, not on muggles present.

 

I like a good, challenging urban hide, muggles and all. (Bring on the flames, purists...)

 

Not enough information to flame you. Are we talking a cache placed without permission out back by the Wal-Mart loading dock in the employees smoking area? Or a micro at a War Memorial in a small City Park? Just a little insight into the average "purists" way of thinking.

 

I'm talking about a cache hidden where there may be a high chance of someone seeing you looking for it. Maybe I should have substituted "purist" with "micro hater"...

 

A cache behind Wal-Mart? Usually just another guardrail / LPC cache that presents little challenge.

 

A black nano hidden on a large metal sculpture in a park. Why hello...

 

As a Purist let me tell you that placing a cache in an area that the cache is highly likely to be compromised is not my problem. The difficulty level of the hide does not factor in muggles. Certainly no more than cache-stealing monkeys in some sub-tropic location. Me find = rating. Them steal = not a rating.

[+nittanycopa]

Should be based on how well it blends into its surroundings, not on muggles present.

 

I like a good, challenging urban hide, muggles and all. (Bring on the flames, purists...)

 

Not enough information to flame you. Are we talking a cache placed without permission out back by the Wal-Mart loading dock in the employees smoking area? Or a micro at a War Memorial in a small City Park? Just a little insight into the average "purists" way of thinking.

 

I'm talking about a cache hidden where there may be a high chance of someone seeing you looking for it. Maybe I should have substituted "purist" with "micro hater"...

 

A cache behind Wal-Mart? Usually just another guardrail / LPC cache that presents little challenge.

 

A black nano hidden on a large metal sculpture in a park. Why hello...

 

As a Purist let me tell you that placing a cache in an area that the cache is highly likely to be compromised is not my problem. The difficulty level of the hide does not factor in muggles. Certainly no more than cache-stealing monkeys in some sub-tropic location. Me find = rating. Them steal = not a rating.

 

My original post in all those quotes agrees with you...the one on blending in with the surroundings to add to difficulty, not based on muggles present.

[+Panther&Pine]

 

I think I have once raised the difficulty for muggle activity once. It's a cache of mine that is located 3 feet below the window of an office. I don't care how little you care about muggles, if you're caught searching for this cache and the muggle inside sees you, they're probably going to have a word with you. Given that this uncomfortable situation is what almost every cacher wants to avoid, I rated my cache half a star higher than I would have otherwise (from a 2 to a 2.5 in this case).

 

 

I'll reply to your question in a private message, but I wanted to address the comment above yours, on my Geocache placed underneath an office window. My theory for Geocaching is I want to bring people somewhere nice. Beneath an office window isn't necessary a *nice* place, but notice the title of my cache: ISU Chipmunk Garden. During the warmer months, I have seen dozens of chipmunks in the area, and this is my motivation for placing a cache here. I just also enjoy the extra challenge of a sneaky cache placement.

 

I was curious as to the logic of that location other any others on campus.

I feel the that cachers should use more mulit's to get people to travel to neat locations that have a high muggle factor. While multis usually get fewer visits I think that is outweighed by the fewer number of mugglings and fishbowl experiences.

 

I'm happy that you've found places that you want to share with the greater caching community. I'm still trying to find a good spot for my first cache.

[+BluesHiker]

It seems to me that muggle activity shouldn't be the reason for raising the difficulty of a cache -- you could wait until the muggles leave. Just today I walked past a cache because of muggles. Then I doubled back and made the find easily once the muggles were gone.

[+dirt_empire]

Non-cachers (heathens) do not enter into my geocaching equation.

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

 

That seems like a very callous reaction to a valid problem. If I remember correctly, GeoCaching is partially about hiding things from public view and perception in order for others to stealthily claim them. Now if you wander up to a bench with a geocache (g.c.) that has three muggles sitting on it and go "excuse me, but I'd like to reach under you to grab a clandestinely hidden contact case that contains a small sheet of paper and nothing else" then that doesn't seem too stealthily. To that point, the muggles or others around them may go up to the cache and palm it without replacing it, thereby denying others the chance to find it while the owner has to go out and replace it. All this due to you not giving a &%#@ because you don't want to be sneaky.

 

This seems to be a problematic mindset among some geocachers. They feel that being sneaky doesn't matter as long as they find the g.c. and sign the log. What. The. Hell. I was driving to work the other day and saw a couple unabashedly lift up a lightpole skirt to grab a cache that was surrounded by muggles just leaving a restaurant. As the couple left all seven of the muggles walked over to get the cache, look at it, then throw it away like trash! All due to someone not being stealthy. I even looked at the people wh ohad done this on that cache's log later that evening and noticed a habit of them making a point about the people watching them find the cache's. No wonder so many get muggled (well that and bad hides/rehides).

 

On topic now, I believe that upping the difficulty on a cache is the wrong way to go about marking muggle activity. Maybe marking the cache with an upmarked terrain would be acceptable. The terrain should not only take into consideration of the phsyical landmarks byt the area it is in as well.

 

Also, please try and be stealthy when getting a cache.

[Mr.Yuck]

Non-cachers (heathens) do not enter into my geocaching equation.

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

 

That seems like a very callous reaction to a valid problem. If I remember correctly, GeoCaching is partially about hiding things from public view and perception in order for others to stealthily claim them. Now if you wander up to a bench with a geocache (g.c.) that has three muggles sitting on it and go "excuse me, but I'd like to reach under you to grab a clandestinely hidden contact case that contains a small sheet of paper and nothing else" then that doesn't seem too stealthily. To that point, the muggles or others around them may go up to the cache and palm it without replacing it, thereby denying others the chance to find it while the owner has to go out and replace it. All this due to you not giving a &%#@ because you don't want to be sneaky.

 

This seems to be a problematic mindset among some geocachers. They feel that being sneaky doesn't matter as long as they find the g.c. and sign the log. What. The. Hell. I was driving to work the other day and saw a couple unabashedly lift up a lightpole skirt to grab a cache that was surrounded by muggles just leaving a restaurant. As the couple left all seven of the muggles walked over to get the cache, look at it, then throw it away like trash! All due to someone not being stealthy. I even looked at the people wh ohad done this on that cache's log later that evening and noticed a habit of them making a point about the people watching them find the cache's. No wonder so many get muggled (well that and bad hides/rehides).

 

On topic now, I believe that upping the difficulty on a cache is the wrong way to go about marking muggle activity. Maybe marking the cache with an upmarked terrain would be acceptable. The terrain should not only take into consideration of the phsyical landmarks byt the area it is in as well.

 

Also, please try and be stealthy when getting a cache.

 

That's why I like to cache in the woods. There ain't no muggles there. Usually, at least.

[+sbell111]

Non-cachers (heathens) do not enter into my geocaching equation.

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

No, it's the next cache seeker's problem. It's their fun that you are ruining.

[+jmw61]

 

This seems to be a problematic mindset among some geocachers. They feel that being sneaky doesn't matter as long as they find the g.c. and sign the log. What. The. Hell. I was driving to work the other day and saw a couple unabashedly lift up a lightpole skirt to grab a cache that was surrounded by muggles just leaving a restaurant. As the couple left all seven of the muggles walked over to get the cache, look at it, then throw it away like trash! All due to someone not being stealthy. I even looked at the people wh ohad done this on that cache's log later that evening and noticed a habit of them making a point about the people watching them find the cache's. No wonder so many get muggled (well that and bad hides/rehides).

 

 

Did you go find the cache they trashed and replace it after watching them?

[+sbell111]

 

This seems to be a problematic mindset among some geocachers. They feel that being sneaky doesn't matter as long as they find the g.c. and sign the log. What. The. Hell. I was driving to work the other day and saw a couple unabashedly lift up a lightpole skirt to grab a cache that was surrounded by muggles just leaving a restaurant. As the couple left all seven of the muggles walked over to get the cache, look at it, then throw it away like trash! All due to someone not being stealthy. I even looked at the people wh ohad done this on that cache's log later that evening and noticed a habit of them making a point about the people watching them find the cache's. No wonder so many get muggled (well that and bad hides/rehides).

 

 

Did you go find the cache they trashed and replace it after watching them?

See the bolded bit.

[+Avernar]

I don't care how little you care about muggles, if you're caught searching for this cache and the muggle inside sees you, they're probably going to have a word with you.

Is that when I find out you haven't told the muggle that there will be people sneaking around their office window and/or you don't have permission to put a cache there?

 

I'm all for not revealing a cache to passing muggles but not telling the tenants/property owner that there is a cache there and what to expect is a bad idea.

[Mr.Yuck]

 

This seems to be a problematic mindset among some geocachers. They feel that being sneaky doesn't matter as long as they find the g.c. and sign the log. What. The. Hell. I was driving to work the other day and saw a couple unabashedly lift up a lightpole skirt to grab a cache that was surrounded by muggles just leaving a restaurant. As the couple left all seven of the muggles walked over to get the cache, look at it, then throw it away like trash! All due to someone not being stealthy. I even looked at the people wh ohad done this on that cache's log later that evening and noticed a habit of them making a point about the people watching them find the cache's. No wonder so many get muggled (well that and bad hides/rehides).

 

 

Did you go find the cache they trashed and replace it after watching them?

See the bolded bit.

 

Then he should have replaced it on the way home!

 

Just kidding, I totally disagree with him/her anyways. I live by the "Never blame the finder, ever", mantra. If you're going to place an LPC outside a busy restaurant, and it goes missing, tough beans. Your hide was an embarrassment to the hobby anyways. I just added that embarrassment sentence, that's not a part of the mantra.

[+niraD]

I live by the "Never blame the finder, ever", mantra. If you're going to place an LPC outside a busy restaurant, and it goes missing, tough beans. Your hide was an embarrassment to the hobby anyways. I just added that embarrassment sentence, that's not a part of the mantra.

I think "Never blame the finder, ever" is a bit extreme, but I have found a few caches where IMHO the best way to be stealthy is to just walk up and grab the cache. If you act like you know what you're doing and you're supposed to be doing it, then most muggles will ignore you. But it's inevitable that someone will try to "act stealthy", and draw the attention of muggles to the cache.

[+jmw61]

 

This seems to be a problematic mindset among some geocachers. They feel that being sneaky doesn't matter as long as they find the g.c. and sign the log. What. The. Hell. I was driving to work the other day and saw a couple unabashedly lift up a lightpole skirt to grab a cache that was surrounded by muggles just leaving a restaurant. As the couple left all seven of the muggles walked over to get the cache, look at it, then throw it away like trash! All due to someone not being stealthy. I even looked at the people wh ohad done this on that cache's log later that evening and noticed a habit of them making a point about the people watching them find the cache's. No wonder so many get muggled (well that and bad hides/rehides).

 

 

Did you go find the cache they trashed and replace it after watching them?

See the bolded bit.

 

And? He had enough time to see and count the number of muggles and watch them walk over to the cache and throw it away.

[+A & J Tooling]

I shouldn't admit this but if you carry a clip board or wear a orange/green safety vest and act like you're suppose to be there, doing something, people leave you alone and pay no attention. The best way to blend in is in plain sight.

 

So next time you see that person out there acting like they're on official business....

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Non-cachers (heathens) do not enter into my geocaching equation.

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

 

That seems like a very callous reaction to a valid problem. If I remember correctly, GeoCaching is partially about hiding things from public view and perception in order for others to stealthily claim them. Now if you wander up to a bench with a geocache (g.c.) that has three muggles sitting on it and go "excuse me, but I'd like to reach under you to grab a clandestinely hidden contact case that contains a small sheet of paper and nothing else" then that doesn't seem too stealthily.

 

Sometimes that might be the best approach when trying to grab a cache. Although I think some people enjoy the stealth aspect, the act of finding a hidden container that the general public doesn't know about, some geocachers seem to want to hide the activity of geocaching from the general public as well. The "always try to be stealthy" approach is only effective if you're always successful in being stealthy.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Non-cachers (heathens) do not enter into my geocaching equation.

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

 

That seems like a very callous reaction to a valid problem. If I remember correctly, GeoCaching is partially about hiding things from public view and perception in order for others to stealthily claim them. Now if you wander up to a bench with a geocache (g.c.) that has three muggles sitting on it and go "excuse me, but I'd like to reach under you to grab a clandestinely hidden contact case that contains a small sheet of paper and nothing else" then that doesn't seem too stealthily.

 

Sometimes that might be the best approach when trying to grab a cache. Although I think some people enjoy the stealth aspect, the act of finding a hidden container that the general public doesn't know about, some geocachers seem to want to hide the activity of geocaching from the general public as well. The "always try to be stealthy" approach is only effective if you're always successful in being stealthy.

The problem is that too many cache owners make their hide too hard for the area and just use "stealth required" to cover up their shortcomings.

 

An urban cache should be obvious to a geocacher but not anyone else. That way the geocacher can retrieve and replace it without calling attention to themselves or the cache. When cachers have to look too hard for a cache they get noticed more by muggles. That causes replacement caches to go missing and perpetuates the cycle. It also means cachers do more damage to the landscaping as they're looking in a wider area. The next cacher will find it harder to see the obvious spot, so they'll likely search an even wider area. Eventually the whole area gets trashed and property managers take notice. Some of them learn that a poorly placed geocache was to blame and our game gets another black eye.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Non-cachers (heathens) do not enter into my geocaching equation.

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

 

That seems like a very callous reaction to a valid problem. If I remember correctly, GeoCaching is partially about hiding things from public view and perception in order for others to stealthily claim them. Now if you wander up to a bench with a geocache (g.c.) that has three muggles sitting on it and go "excuse me, but I'd like to reach under you to grab a clandestinely hidden contact case that contains a small sheet of paper and nothing else" then that doesn't seem too stealthily.

 

Sometimes that might be the best approach when trying to grab a cache. Although I think some people enjoy the stealth aspect, the act of finding a hidden container that the general public doesn't know about, some geocachers seem to want to hide the activity of geocaching from the general public as well. The "always try to be stealthy" approach is only effective if you're always successful in being stealthy.

The problem is that too many cache owners make their hide too hard for the area and just use "stealth required" to cover up their shortcomings.

 

An urban cache should be obvious to a geocacher but not anyone else. That way the geocacher can retrieve and replace it without calling attention to themselves or the cache. When cachers have to look too hard for a cache they get noticed more by muggles. That causes replacement caches to go missing and perpetuates the cycle. It also means cachers do more damage to the landscaping as they're looking in a wider area. The next cacher will find it harder to see the obvious spot, so they'll likely search an even wider area. Eventually the whole area gets trashed and property managers take notice. Some of them learn that a poorly placed geocache was to blame and our game gets another black eye.

 

Sometimes a cache is east to locate, but the act of retrieving and replacing the cache while avoiding detection is the hard part. One of the worst was a cache outside a starbucks that was stuck inside a metal structure. It took me less than a minute to locate the container but trying to extract it from it's hiding place took several minutes. Only then did I discover that the container was actually a letter box and the real cache was about 12" away hidden in an identical manner. I think the only reason that I didn't get caught finding it was because I did it on January 1st about 8:30 in the morning.

[+Don_J]

Now if you wander up to a bench with a geocache (g.c.) that has three muggles sitting on it and go "excuse me, but I'd like to reach under you to grab a clandestinely hidden contact case that contains a small sheet of paper and nothing else" then that doesn't seem too stealthily. To that point, the muggles or others around them may go up to the cache and palm it without replacing it, thereby denying others the chance to find it while the owner has to go out and replace it. All this due to you not giving a &%#@ because you don't want to be sneaky.

 

 

I had someone do exactly that at one of my caches, (said so in his log). It was gone the next day. Replaced it and it was gone a week later. I figured, the heck with it. Because of this one impatient cacher, the rest don't get to learn about the new city park, tucked away in the foothills.

 

As far as the OP. I have seen plenty of listings that say, "difficulty raised because of muggles). I figure that if they are going to mis-rate their cache, at they are nice enough to admit it so I can make the adjustment mentally.

[+myotis]

Now if you wander up to a bench with a geocache (g.c.) that has three muggles sitting on it and go "excuse me, but I'd like to reach under you to grab a clandestinely hidden contact case that contains a small sheet of paper and nothing else" then that doesn't seem too stealthily. To that point, the muggles or others around them may go up to the cache and palm it without replacing it, thereby denying others the chance to find it while the owner has to go out and replace it. All this due to you not giving a &%#@ because you don't want to be sneaky.

 

 

I had someone do exactly that at one of my caches, (said so in his log). It was gone the next day. Replaced it and it was gone a week later. I figured, the heck with it. Because of this one impatient cacher, the rest don't get to learn about the new city park, tucked away in the foothills.

 

As far as the OP. I have seen plenty of listings that say, "difficulty raised because of muggles). I figure that if they are going to mis-rate their cache, at they are nice enough to admit it so I can make the adjustment mentally.

 

Sorry, but I do not follow your logic. Was that the only place in the new park you could hide a cache? If you would have hidden the cache in the new park where someone could hunt it without muggle issues, would not that have worked?

 

What I have noticed on numerous caches by playgrounds, where you feel like a peeping tom, or where there are muggle problems at the cache location, is there is almost always a nearby location where a cache could easily be hidden without any issue searching for it. I just do not understand why cache hiders place caches where you have to worry about someone calling the cops on you or if you get it others will see you and muggle the cache instead of choosing a nearby spot where the cache could be searched for with no issues.

[+jacob501]

So I'm curious as to what people think about increasing a cache's difficulty rating based on muggle activity. I've seen LPC's difficulty listed in the 1.5, 2 and 2.5 range due to being in a higher muggle visited parking lot... I don't believe any LPC should ever be over a 1 difficulty even if the pole itself is growing out of a muggles head (well maybe then it could be necessary). According to the Geocaching.com Glossary "Difficulty relates to the mental challenge of finding a cache." If Google Maps places the magic dot over a Light Pole, it doesn't take any more mental capacity to wait out the muggle eating his happy meal next to GZ in order to find that mystical film canister under the hood. I didn't rack my brain scheduling out my visit the next day or later that night to avoid the muggles. And on that note if we don't up the difficulty when a cache is harder to find in the pitch black of night then the reverse should also true during the day with all the muggles. End of rant, let me know what you think.

Just use the "Stealth Required" attribute!!!

[+Don_J]

Now if you wander up to a bench with a geocache (g.c.) that has three muggles sitting on it and go "excuse me, but I'd like to reach under you to grab a clandestinely hidden contact case that contains a small sheet of paper and nothing else" then that doesn't seem too stealthily. To that point, the muggles or others around them may go up to the cache and palm it without replacing it, thereby denying others the chance to find it while the owner has to go out and replace it. All this due to you not giving a &%#@ because you don't want to be sneaky.

 

 

I had someone do exactly that at one of my caches, (said so in his log). It was gone the next day. Replaced it and it was gone a week later. I figured, the heck with it. Because of this one impatient cacher, the rest don't get to learn about the new city park, tucked away in the foothills.

 

As far as the OP. I have seen plenty of listings that say, "difficulty raised because of muggles). I figure that if they are going to mis-rate their cache, at they are nice enough to admit it so I can make the adjustment mentally.

 

Sorry, but I do not follow your logic. Was that the only place in the new park you could hide a cache? If you would have hidden the cache in the new park where someone could hunt it without muggle issues, would not that have worked?

 

What I have noticed on numerous caches by playgrounds, where you feel like a peeping tom, or where there are muggle problems at the cache location, is there is almost always a nearby location where a cache could easily be hidden without any issue searching for it. I just do not understand why cache hiders place caches where you have to worry about someone calling the cops on you or if you get it others will see you and muggle the cache instead of choosing a nearby spot where the cache could be searched for with no issues.

 

The cache was located at a back corner of the park. It was the furthest point from the parking lot and playground. It offered a view of the valley below. I have been there over a dozen times and have never seen anyone using the bench. The one day that someone is using it, CacherX shows up and asks the guy to move. Personally, I would never do such a thing.

 

As far as why I put it there instead of somewhere else, it was because that was the spot I wanted to bring people to.

[+J the Goat]

Non-cachers (heathens) do not enter into my geocaching equation.

If you are dumb enough to put a cache where others might see me retrieving it, that is your problem.

 

That seems like a very callous reaction to a valid problem. If I remember correctly, GeoCaching is partially about hiding things from public view and perception in order for others to stealthily claim them. Now if you wander up to a bench with a geocache (g.c.) that has three muggles sitting on it and go "excuse me, but I'd like to reach under you to grab a clandestinely hidden contact case that contains a small sheet of paper and nothing else" then that doesn't seem too stealthily. To that point, the muggles or others around them may go up to the cache and palm it without replacing it, thereby denying others the chance to find it while the owner has to go out and replace it. All this due to you not giving a &%#@ because you don't want to be sneaky.

 

This seems to be a problematic mindset among some geocachers. They feel that being sneaky doesn't matter as long as they find the g.c. and sign the log. What. The. Hell. I was driving to work the other day and saw a couple unabashedly lift up a lightpole skirt to grab a cache that was surrounded by muggles just leaving a restaurant. As the couple left all seven of the muggles walked over to get the cache, look at it, then throw it away like trash! All due to someone not being stealthy. I even looked at the people wh ohad done this on that cache's log later that evening and noticed a habit of them making a point about the people watching them find the cache's. No wonder so many get muggled (well that and bad hides/rehides).

 

On topic now, I believe that upping the difficulty on a cache is the wrong way to go about marking muggle activity. Maybe marking the cache with an upmarked terrain would be acceptable. The terrain should not only take into consideration of the phsyical landmarks byt the area it is in as well.

 

Also, please try and be stealthy when getting a cache.

 

My bolding. I disagree. For some it might be, but this is not at all what geocaching is about for me or those I cache with. If you don't put any effort into a creative urban hide, I feel no obligation to: A) hunt for your cache, or if I do hunt for your cache, to be careful about retrieving or putting it back "stealthily". If you don't care about your cache, neither do I.

 

Muggles shouldn't effect the D rating. Like others have said, come back later. Then the cache will be as difficult as it's rated (maybe )