plugusmaximus Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 First off I'm new to geocaching (33 finds so far). Now I have read the guidelines about placing geocaches and certainly many of the caches I have found have led me to discover hidden gems and locations which I never knew existed despite living in the area or being familiar with the area. Fantastic!! However, in my home town there is a geocache owner who seem fairly prolific in establishing the most tedious geocaches I could imagine. They are stuck in phone boxes, behind benches, outside peoples house in residential streets (muggle residents look suspiciously on), located in highly littered areas frequented by chavs, or on the corner of walls that are clearly used as places to urinate. Is this allowed? Are they not vetted before they are launched? I love having caches on my doorstep but who is going to enjoy searching by a security fence on a crappy housing estate? Basically I think they contravene the guidelines! Quote Link to comment
+abiherts Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Ah you cache not far from me, not that I've been to Loughton yet but there are some fantastic caches in Epping Forest and the Lee Valley. For some people caching is about the numbers and are not too fussy about locations. You can put these caches and cache setter on your ignore list. Unfortunately the reviewers are not able to visit each cache before they publish it and as long as the cache does not break any guidelines, they have to approve it. I would suggest checking the size and location of each cache before you go seeking it and sticking the others on your ignore list. Hope to meet up one day. Abiherts Quote Link to comment
+MartyBartfast Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 For a minute I thought you must be talking about Portsmouth, which has a similar problem. Anyway, these caches probably aren't contravening any guidelines, as there are no guidelines to 'quality' so nothing will be done. For now just ignore this persons caches, and add them to your ignore list. Someone made a suggestion for the ability to ignore a 'cacher', so all that person's caches would be ignored, and I think that is being considered which might make it easier to ignore this person's naff hides in future. Quote Link to comment
Santa_Claws Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Is this allowed? Are they not vetted before they are launched? I love having caches on my doorstep but who is going to enjoy searching by a security fence on a crappy housing estate? Basically I think they contravene the guidelines! Hello fellow hater of PPCP (Pi** Poor Cache Placement) They contravene no guidelines, and not enough people "self Police" their local area, as it looks like you're keen to do. Self policing often instigates local grudges, and simply isn't worth the bother. So, put them on your ignore list, and watch the quality of cache hides fall off the edge of an abyss. Quote Link to comment
KaesKids Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I would actually love it if someone around where we live was like that but since there isn't we've been doing evil stuff but yes I have to admit I don't like most of the ones right on the side of the road one we even got honked at by a semi-truck and did not find it but realy the only thing that is against the guidelines is placing one on someones property without the owners permission. Quote Link to comment
plugusmaximus Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 Anyway, these caches probably aren't contravening any guidelines, as there are no guidelines to 'quality' so nothing will be done. "When you go to hide a geocache, think of the reason you are bringing people to that spot. If the only reason is for the geocache, then find a better spot." – briansnat Seems to me to be quite clear advice, but hey ho! I didn't realise you could block certain peeps!! I may be in Loughton but I'm no Essex boy! Born and bred in Hertfordshire and then spent three years living in Pompey drinking. I mean studying, ... so I might see you peeps yet! Cheers for the replies! Quote Link to comment
+MartyBartfast Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 "When you go to hide a geocache, think of the reason you are bringing people to that spot. If the only reason is for the geocache, then find a better spot." – briansnat "Because it's the place I chucked my guts up the first time I got off my trolley on my 13th birthday" "Because this was the phone box where my mate made a hoax phone call to the fire brigade, it was a gr8 laff when they turned up with their blues & twos" There may be reasons, which might not appeal to or be obvious to the rest of us. I didn't realise you could block certain peeps!! You can't yet, but it's being considered for a future release Quote Link to comment
+The Blorenges Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 ... I love having caches on my doorstep... You realise you're inviting trouble, don't you? MrsB sits back and awaits the first placement of the the new "Doorstep Doddles" series. Quote Link to comment
+NickandAliandEliza Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 It's pretty easy to put caches on your ignore list. Long gone are the days when we bother about clearing all our local caches. We're from your neck of the woods and can guess who the cache owner is that you're talking about. You should think of them as easy finds that you can leave until you have to find one on a specific date (eg to fill your calendar) or if you have a bug in a race (like the GAGB Coin Mileage Race) to get easy mileage. The advice from Briansnat is just that - advice. It's not one of the guidelines, as it would be very difficult for a reviewer to judge quality with most caches. It's been suggested before that there should be an extra section - viewable to everyone on the cache page - where the cache owner gives a reason why they are bringing cachers to this place. But then again, maybe some people do have their favourite ivy covered tree or dog doo bin that they feel loads of others would want to see....... As much as I love all our reviewers to bits and don't want to add to their work load - (and given what I've written above) the time has come to try to introduce a bit of quality assurance. Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 (edited) First off I'm new to geocaching (33 finds so far). Now I have read the guidelines about placing geocaches and certainly many of the caches I have found have led me to discover hidden gems and locations which I never knew existed despite living in the area or being familiar with the area. Fantastic!! However, in my home town there is a geocache owner who seem fairly prolific in establishing the most tedious geocaches I could imagine. They are stuck in phone boxes, behind benches, outside peoples house in residential streets (muggle residents look suspiciously on), located in highly littered areas frequented by chavs, or on the corner of walls that are clearly used as places to urinate. Is this allowed? Are they not vetted before they are launched? I love having caches on my doorstep but who is going to enjoy searching by a security fence on a crappy housing estate? Basically I think they contravene the guidelines! The tests applied by our wonderful reviewers are that the follow the "guidelines" no more. If the quality had to be tested, these reviewers would: 1) Have to go out and enjoy themselves (can't have that!) 2) Take months to review a cache with an ever building waiting list 3) Definitely lose their jobs/be served with divorce papers/keel over and die of exhaustion I think we need the anti-favourite system... every 10 caches you should be able to add one to your "I'd rather die than do this again" list. Edited June 8, 2011 by NattyBooshka Quote Link to comment
+jason johnson Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 There was a new cacher started putting out caches around the town where I grew up which I hoped would have been a good series however the first 4 or 5 were very simple finds, tucked in nondescript corners that were generally below par and didn`t take you anywhere interesting. Then 1 came out that was almost on someones doorstep in a corner of a path, that, when I got there looked to be where all the dog poop bags seemed to hang around together in a gang. Needless to say I didn`t even look for the cache, and when I logged online it was only as a note that said that I didn`t fancy furtling through the poop bags for a film can. The way I see it if no-one points out the problems the new cacher just carries on putting out geolitter and calling it a cache. Another vote for the find xxx amount of caches before you can put your own out. Quote Link to comment
+Bear and Ragged Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I think we need the anti-favourite system... every 10 caches you should be able to add one to your "I'd rather die than do this again" list. No. It should be a "I have absolutely no intention of finding this cache, or any cache like it" vote. Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I think we need the anti-favourite system... every 10 caches you should be able to add one to your "I'd rather die than do this again" list. No. It should be a "I have absolutely no intention of finding this cache, or any cache like it" vote. Yes indeed... But you don't know that until you've been there! Quote Link to comment
+Bear and Ragged Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 (edited) I think we need the anti-favourite system... every 10 caches you should be able to add one to your "I'd rather die than do this again" list. No. It should be a "I have absolutely no intention of finding this cache, or any cache like it" vote. Yes indeed... But you don't know that until you've been there! Been there , seen it, walked (ran!) away. You say "I'd rather die than do this again" suggesting you found and claimed it. Edited June 8, 2011 by Bear and Ragged Quote Link to comment
+sTeamTraen Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Geocaching, for me, is about having a little bit of modest adventure injected into my otherwise incredibly safe existence. As such, I don't expect every cache to take me to a fantastic new location with a spectacular view. If it does, so much the better. If not, well, at least the cache owner took the time to go out there, place the container, measure the coordinates, and submit the page. (That's actually quite an undertaking for a substantial number of people.) And I always get to go somewhere on the planet where I've never been before. That's actually an amazing privilege, which almost every person in previous generations would never have been able to contemplate. I have learned so much from this hobby about how the world works, whether it's by visiting interesting botanical sites, amazing geological phenomena, or simply seeing the sorts of things that go on in the more obscure corners of cities (including, yes, several non-family-friendly activities). I don't think that more than 1% of the caches which I've found caused me to think "Why did I just waste my time doing that?". Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I think we need the anti-favourite system... every 10 caches you should be able to add one to your "I'd rather die than do this again" list. No. It should be a "I have absolutely no intention of finding this cache, or any cache like it" vote. Yes indeed... But you don't know that until you've been there! Been there , seen it, walked (ran!) away. You say "I'd rather die than do this again" suggesting you found and claimed it. Well... It's not about the numbers... But I like the stats Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I must add that I have found a classic in a car park of a supermarket, that I visit twice a week. Was tempted to log "thanks for bringing me to this wonderful place" even considered "TFTC every little helps" but thought better to not log and pray that the magnet went missing and got archived. My biggest rubbish cache idea is next to or in the bushes bear children's play areas... If I want to look like a pedo I'll let you know. Why why why? Or maybe it's a special swing like no other on earth! Quote Link to comment
+dgwebster Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Im gonna do somethin dangerous here. Im gonna defend these to a degree. I love both caching and urban caching. Its good to give both a reason to be there though other than "this was within required distance from nearest caches". Getting out and about to local urban caches supports my ability to random cache whereas more planning and time allocation (and persuading the missus to look after the kids) is required. And so for this, to anyone placing urban caches, keep on doing so, if you dont like them, you dont have to do them! Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Im gonna do somethin dangerous here. Im gonna defend these to a degree. I love both caching and urban caching. Its good to give both a reason to be there though other than "this was within required distance from nearest caches". Getting out and about to local urban caches supports my ability to random cache whereas more planning and time allocation (and persuading the missus to look after the kids) is required. And so for this, to anyone placing urban caches, keep on doing so, if you dont like them, you dont have to do them! Urbans can be great... Quick diversion if I have 5 minutes, and another find... All the better if I have 30 minutes and the cache is in line of sight if a decent alehouse! Quote Link to comment
+Delta68 Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 It should be a "I have absolutely no intention of finding this cache, or any cache like it" vote. You can! There's nothing to stop anyone from having a bookmark list called: "I have absolutely no intention of finding this cache, or any cache like it" COs of duff caches will soon get the message... Mark Quote Link to comment
+martlakes Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Hi plugusmaximus They key thing to realise about caching is this: -------------- You don't have to do them all. ------------ No, really, not gratuitous advice, just the key to enjoying the hobby. There are xxxxxx thousands of caches in the UK now, you will never do them all, so you've already "lost". So, you're free to use your limited time to find the caches that you enjoy. Just cos it's on the map, doesn't mean you have to go find it. Once you fully understand this, crud caches in dog alleys suddenly cause no stress whatsoever! Leave them be, walk on by, put on ignore list or whatever you like. Check out the cache page, look at the map, and decide if you want to go there. Enjoy the finer side of caching, whatever that is for you. Have fun. Quote Link to comment
+Mallah Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 (edited) It might help if the Fav option was opened up so that you had a chance to vote for every cache you have found, (bit like leaving ebay feedback) rather than getting Fav Beans for every 10 you find. This way we could put a vote against each cache as we log it and this would show up the 'rubbish' ones. We know how many finds there are for each cache, so we could see that 'x' finders out of 'y' liked this cache - and if you didn't like it to say why in the log. Mind you, there are bound to be some who put a Fav point against some of the dog bin ones? Edited June 9, 2011 by mike142sl Quote Link to comment
+Fuchsiamagic Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Most of these "rubbish" caches are usually put out by someone who has just discovered geocaching, thinks it's a fantastic new hobby (in their words), hasn't researched it properly and feels compelled to contribute as soon as they can by setting the type of caches described. However, over the years I have watched this type of cacher come and go as they soon lose interest and their caches will get archived due to lack of maintenance just as quickly as they appeared. Just look at their stats. I bet their finds are trailing off already! Quote Link to comment
+burtsbodgers Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Sorry if this has been said, i haven't read all the postings. This surely is when you log the cache "why oh why is it here" or "thanks for another pointless cache" etc etc.... The only way a cache setter will learn to improve is by the feed back they get through the logs. If cachers just leave blank logs or just TFTC, they may think they are doing a good job. It also comes down to the caches that they have found themselves, all cachers and setters must lead by example. Fortunately the new Favourites system could help, particularly if you could filter out all those caches with 0 votes, but i dont think that it will make much difference. One way to look at it though, is just how much better the good ones will seem! Quote Link to comment
+mickyz Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 :lol: @MartyBartfast :lol: Yes, co-ords just went out the window from early 2010, so many were placed in the middle of main roads it got scary. So looking for a nano somewhere within 30ish feet with no hint... oh and most are in view of nearby houses. I look suspicious in the countryside, what do I look like in town Quote Link to comment
jadenrich2101 Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 My biggest rubbish cache idea is next to or in the bushes near children's play areas... If I want to look like a pedo I'll let you know. Why why why? Or maybe it's a special swing like no other on earth! Weve got two...Tiny Tony and Pennington Path, both placed in trees on site with one of the nicest playgrounds ive ever taken my little boy to! Aswell as looking like some dodgy druggie rumagin through the bushes there is also a main road right next to the tree called St Helens road! Completly pointless in everyway....i found it because i was there with my son (didnt even attempt to find pennington path) I just think these ppl are silly for trying to place caches n have ppl say its a "great find" when its really not....Ive had a few ideas of where to place my first cache but untill ive found at least 100 i wont be placing an unexperienced cache Quote Link to comment
+MBFace Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Weve got two...Tiny Tony and Pennington Path, both placed in trees on site with one of the nicest playgrounds ive ever taken my little boy to! Aswell as looking like some dodgy druggie rumagin through the bushes there is also a main road right next to the tree called St Helens road! Completly pointless in everyway....i found it because i was there with my son (didnt even attempt to find pennington path) I just think these ppl are silly for trying to place caches n have ppl say its a "great find" when its really not....Ive had a few ideas of where to place my first cache but untill ive found at least 100 i wont be placing an unexperienced cache But, apart from a mention of muggle central, your own log implies you are happy enough with Tiny Tony - more positive feedback to the owner. Quote Link to comment
+Palujia Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 In the Oxfordshire area there are several "difficult" caches - one I know of in Burford - the co-ordinates lead you to the area of the public loos - not a good idea to be hanging round in the area ! Another in the Ancient Butter cross monument in the centre of Witney. This has been damaged in the past by kids so the local police keep a good eye on it - the cache is a nano in the rafters so it can be difficult. Most cachers seem to get it late at night - with the increased foot patrols in the town centre this can cause "difficulties".They are not rubbish caches per se but I think even "cache and dash" drive bys are more fun and cause less problems than the ones put out in "over public" places such as playgrounds, centres of roundabouts, too near public monuments etc. When putting out caches a lot of thought should go in to it = which is why some organisations (like the GAGB) are giving awards for good caches !! My wife does not walk far so my first series is a drive by cache and dash with thought put into parking, and no more than a level 1 1/2 terrain It can be challenging to make them interesting but - so far mostly good comments ! enjoy the pastime and if some caches appear in dodgy areas for what ever reason - look at the maps ! and, as with all things - It's your decision whether to do them or not Happy caching# Palujia Quote Link to comment
I! Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 It's pretty easy to put caches on your ignore list. Long gone are the days when we bother about clearing all our local caches. I resisted using the "ignore" list for a long time, as I knew I'd know I was missing some local caches. But now I've got several tedious-looking micros on the list, the map feels almost like it did when I started -- every one is a cache I'd actually like to visit. Quote Link to comment
jadenrich2101 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Weve got two...Tiny Tony and Pennington Path, both placed in trees on site with one of the nicest playgrounds ive ever taken my little boy to! Aswell as looking like some dodgy druggie rumagin through the bushes there is also a main road right next to the tree called St Helens road! Completly pointless in everyway....i found it because i was there with my son (didnt even attempt to find pennington path) I just think these ppl are silly for trying to place caches n have ppl say its a "great find" when its really not....Ive had a few ideas of where to place my first cache but untill ive found at least 100 i wont be placing an unexperienced cache But, apart from a mention of muggle central, your own log implies you are happy enough with Tiny Tony - more positive feedback to the owner. I no the log didnt explain that the cache was in a poop places because at the time i didnt no how to write "its pants" in the nicest possible way! From now on im going to look for caches that i no are in a green area or a place id enjoy visiting with my family Quote Link to comment
+redsox_mark Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Sorry if this has been said, i haven't read all the postings. This surely is when you log the cache "why oh why is it here" or "thanks for another pointless cache" etc etc.... The only way a cache setter will learn to improve is by the feed back they get through the logs. I do try to give "constructive feedback" on caches I don't like, but like many others I suspect, I find this tricky. I don't want to offend the owner; and don't want to be embarrassed about my comments if I meet him/her at an event. So I would not say "thanks for another pointless cache". But I might say "I was not comfortable with this location, due to it being so close to the dog toilet bin". And if there is anything good to say, I'll add that too. I remember one multi where I really enjoyed the several virtual stages, but hated the final cache location - when there were lots of nearby locations for the final that were better. I said just that - loved the walk, would have preferred the final in a different location (rather than on a busy bridge). Quote Link to comment
+ForsdykeFinders Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 As a Loughton resident, I only noticed these caches a couple of weeks ago and am struggling to muster the enthusiasm to go get them. It is a shame as there are a number of historic spots in the town that could get a mention rather than put them in boring spots. Looks like at leat one has gone bad (if Bones1 cant find it then suspect it has gone!). I try to do a little research on the local area and find a few facts as isnt difficult grabbing stuff off the internet. Maybe they have been driven to put some in the town due to the restrictions placing caches in Epping Forest...but that is another story! Quote Link to comment
team tisri Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Sorry if this has been said, i haven't read all the postings. This surely is when you log the cache "why oh why is it here" or "thanks for another pointless cache" etc etc.... The only way a cache setter will learn to improve is by the feed back they get through the logs. I do try to give "constructive feedback" on caches I don't like, but like many others I suspect, I find this tricky. I don't want to offend the owner; and don't want to be embarrassed about my comments if I meet him/her at an event. So I would not say "thanks for another pointless cache". But I might say "I was not comfortable with this location, due to it being so close to the dog toilet bin". And if there is anything good to say, I'll add that too. I remember one multi where I really enjoyed the several virtual stages, but hated the final cache location - when there were lots of nearby locations for the final that were better. I said just that - loved the walk, would have preferred the final in a different location (rather than on a busy bridge). I like this approach, if I've been in an area that made me feel uneasy searching I'll usually say so in the log using terms that relate to why I didn't like it. I can't help thinking that "I didn't search for long because the area felt very exposed" is far more useful, both to the owner and any other readers, than "thanks for a pointless cache". Quote Link to comment
+Happy Humphrey Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 I think that there are several approaches to discourage the random cache placer. I favour either to log a polite note to the effect that it's not the sort of cache you felt you wanted a "find" against, or don't log the cache at all (even if you found it). Obviously, most people have to start taking an approach like this or else we deserve nothing better. But hopefully, the cache owner will realise that there's a consensus that the cache isn't doing its job. Or will start wondering why they only have five finds per cache when other around have dozens. I must add that these caches are pretty rare in my experience, and with all the choice and tools now available it's easy to select a variety of reasonable caches. Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 (edited) I think that there are several approaches to discourage the random cache placer. I favour either to log a polite note to the effect that it's not the sort of cache you felt you wanted a "find" against, or don't log the cache at all (even if you found it). Obviously, most people have to start taking an approach like this or else we deserve nothing better. But hopefully, the cache owner will realise that there's a consensus that the cache isn't doing its job. Or will start wondering why they only have five finds per cache when other around have dozens. I must add that these caches are pretty rare in my experience, and with all the choice and tools now available it's easy to select a variety of reasonable caches. One here got archived by it's owners as they could tell that it wasn't being enjoyed. Normally I wouldn't name names, but gepellom had the game at heart and took in their unpopular (and random) cache. Since then they have hidden some of the most interesting hides that I've seen in 14ish years hunting lunchboxes, not that they place lunchboxes often. For me they have raised the bar locally, and this is partly giving the people what they want, and partly great effort and planning. Hat's off to them, and I'd love to see others follow in their footsteps. In the early years of caching round these parts, I feared leaving negative logs as there were so few caches... and I think that I've kept that habit. I have refused to log a find or two, but from this day on I promise to call a spade a spade and say when I don't like a cache, but with the right words! Edited June 12, 2011 by NattyBooshka Quote Link to comment
+perth pathfinders Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 (edited) Unfortunately it happens everywhere, the 'throw a reused container out the car window and take coords' is all to familiar. But people follow by example, once a trail of rubbish caches are out there, the trend of hiding this type follows, we try to hide a lock n lock box, even if it is the tiniest box along a pretty country roadside with nice views. Anyone is welcome to copy this series - K.I.S.S. Everyone's interpretation of a good cache is different though, not all can be a beautiful walk with a huge free carpark with facilities, people are interested in industrial landscapes, war relics, town centre nano's for those on foot, public art, local history, sneaky hard hides .......... Hmmm, perhaps I should do a new series: Carp Caches - at a Sewage works near you, Double Whammy - find a film pot whilst dumping your scabby sofa, Can I have a P Bob? - takeaway container behind the biggest tree in a layby Drinking Dens - build a campfire whilst enjoying your tinnies ............ :ph34r: Edited June 13, 2011 by perth pathfinders Quote Link to comment
+SpankyBanksy Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Interesting topic especially when one of you own caches has been mentioned as being a rubbish cache. Now I don’t partially like nano’s because they need a lot of maintenance i.e. log books so you have to use them wisely. So nano’s have there place, only experience and time will tell whether they last or not. My cache has been established since the 10th of Sept 2008. I’m rather proud to own this little fella which draws people to view the structure rather than the kids that vandalise it. So Paulia has unfairly mentioned 2 caches which I feel don’t warrant the label of a rubbish cache. (Pride back in place ) I could name far worse caches than these, but it all comes to perspective of the cacher and how experienced they are. I wouldn’t want to put new cachers off from placing caches as that would defeat the whole purpose of caching. But we could all encourage cachers when logging DNF’s and Finds our views in a positive manner since that’s what it’s there for. Now I have circular walks and urban caches. My urbans tend to be quirky and harder to find which means you’ll remember it better. Circular walks are about the experience over the whole walk were the individual caches themselves are not necessarily memorable the walk is. The trick is to get a combination of the two in an interesting place based on a theme and you’ve hit the jackpot. Watch the favourites pour in!!! Quote Link to comment
+Malpas Wanderer Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 My KISS caches take a slightly different approach. http://coord.info/GC2RPEH http://coord.info/GC2TRKQ Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Of course... There's lots of poor hides in great locations... Beautiful countryside with family friendly terrain, littered by poorly hidden film canisters... No swaps for the kids, just soggy log sheets as they're not waterproof. Quote Link to comment
+Mallah Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 (edited) There is an 'under review' suggestion that new cache hiders take a simple test/quiz to prove they have actually read the guidelines. Might reduce some of these less favourable hides. Edited June 13, 2011 by mike142sl Quote Link to comment
+keehotee Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 (edited) ... whoops Edited June 13, 2011 by keehotee Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 There is an 'under review' suggestion that new cache hiders take a simple test/quiz to prove they have actually read the guidelines. Might reduce some of these less favourable hides. Can't see that working. Cache submission page in one tab, guidelines in another. Quote Link to comment
stiab3 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 It might help if the Fav option was opened up so that you had a chance to vote for every cache you have found, (bit like leaving ebay feedback) rather than getting Fav Beans for every 10 you find. This way we could put a vote against each cache as we log it and this would show up the 'rubbish' ones. We know how many finds there are for each cache, so we could see that 'x' finders out of 'y' liked this cache - and if you didn't like it to say why in the log. Mind you, there are bound to be some who put a Fav point against some of the dog bin ones? I thought you could already do this. Give each cache a star rating (out of 4). . . Quote Link to comment
+MartyBartfast Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 It might help if the Fav option was opened up so that you had a chance to vote for every cache you have found, (bit like leaving ebay feedback) rather than getting Fav Beans for every 10 you find. This way we could put a vote against each cache as we log it and this would show up the 'rubbish' ones. We know how many finds there are for each cache, so we could see that 'x' finders out of 'y' liked this cache - and if you didn't like it to say why in the log. Mind you, there are bound to be some who put a Fav point against some of the dog bin ones? I thought you could already do this. Give each cache a star rating (out of 4). . . No, you may be thinking of GC Vote which is a browser add-on which you can install and gives you the option of doing that, but I think there's only a minority who use it. Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Had me scratching my head. Browser add ons are all well and good, but thankfully IE is losing browser war 2 and people have the choice of at least 4 browsers... So a browser add on will always be used by the minority. I miss G:UK Quote Link to comment
+Mallah Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 There is an 'under review' suggestion that new cache hiders take a simple test/quiz to prove they have actually read the guidelines. Might reduce some of these less favourable hides. Can't see that working. Cache submission page in one tab, guidelines in another. Which is what we have now isn't it? Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 There is an 'under review' suggestion that new cache hiders take a simple test/quiz to prove they have actually read the guidelines. Might reduce some of these less favourable hides. Can't see that working. Cache submission page in one tab, guidelines in another. Which is what we have now isn't it? No, what we have now is sometimes just the submission page, guidelines never read. Quote Link to comment
+Mallah Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 There is an 'under review' suggestion that new cache hiders take a simple test/quiz to prove they have actually read the guidelines. Might reduce some of these less favourable hides. Can't see that working. Cache submission page in one tab, guidelines in another. Which is what we have now isn't it? No, what we have now is sometimes just the submission page, guidelines never read. At the bottom of the submission page there are two tick boxes to claim you have read the guidelines etc(with a link to another page). Presumably people just tick them from day one without actually reading them. The idea of the test/quiz is that it forces new cache hiders to actually read the guidelines, which will hopefully go some way to educating etc. I wouldn't want the quiz every time though, just the first time you hide a cache. Quote Link to comment
+NattyBooshka Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Ok... I'm with the programme... But speed reading for an answer and reading are two different things. I'd like to see them enforce the at least 20 finds before a hide that they recommend in the getting started guide. Maybe do something like the favourites... So every 20th cache entitles you to a hide? By the time you're entitled to your 5th hide you should have a feel for what makes a good cache and what doesn't... Especially if the first hide has been muggled and the second got critical feedback. Quote Link to comment
team tisri Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 Ok... I'm with the programme... But speed reading for an answer and reading are two different things. I'd like to see them enforce the at least 20 finds before a hide that they recommend in the getting started guide. Maybe do something like the favourites... So every 20th cache entitles you to a hide? By the time you're entitled to your 5th hide you should have a feel for what makes a good cache and what doesn't... Especially if the first hide has been muggled and the second got critical feedback. Trouble with that is that in a place like London it's easy for a new cacher to spend a day out hunting and come home having found 50-60 film pots, and then figure that film pots on the backs of signs are the way forward. In the meantime someone in an area with lower cache density will probably take longer to chalk up very many finds but will encounter a much wider range of caches and get a better idea of what's good and what isn't much faster. In urban areas it's often the case that film pots are about as big as you can get away with, and sometimes even too big to get away with, but it always seems a shame when you get a suburban or rural area and the best someone manages is a film pot on the back of a sign. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.