What makes a "bad" cache?

[+ARHogFanz]

The discussion on "No Hides Untill 100 finds" got me thinking. We've had the thread on what makes a good cache. I'm a relative noob & would like to know what you consider a "bad" cache.

 

Thanks!

Melissa

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

Neglect by CO and poor containers (wet, mouldy and cruddy inside)

[+L0ne.R]

Neglect by CO and poor containers (wet, mouldy and cruddy inside)

 

Yes - poorly maintained, cheap leaky cache containers and

• unattractive locations (e.g. parking lots, dumping grounds)
• bad coordinates (sometimes obtained using Google Maps/Google Earth)
• bad coordinates, on purpose because it's more fun that way
• caches placed just to up the numbers, no regard for the finder's caching experience (every smiley is a good smiley}
• caches with poorly written cache descriptions - poor grammar, spelling mistakes, no punctuation or capitals (never saw one of these that resulted in a great caching experience)
• a hint that says "email me for a hint"
• improper Difficulty/Terrain ratings (e.g. terrain is a 2 but cache is 12 feet up a tree)
• new COs that get billigerent in their cache notes instead of apologizing and fixing a problem (usually happens when private property issues are pointing out by finders)
• micro caches where a larger swag size cache will fit

Edited July 10, 2011 by Lone R

[+briansnat]

For me it's the location. Mundane or unappealing places like parking lots, loading docks, litter strewn urban lots, median strips, guardrails along a non-descript section of road.

 

A poor container will also detract from the quality of the cache as far as I'm concerned but I'd rather find a lousy container in a cool area than an ammo box next to a dumpster.

[+Mom-n-Andy]

Swamps. Mud. Mosquitos. Poison Ivy. Especially when the CO bypasses perfectly nice areas to hide a cache there.

[mresoteric]

Swamps. Mud. Mosquitos. Poison Ivy. Especially when the CO bypasses perfectly nice areas to hide a cache there.

 

I disagree. At least on the swamps and mud. There are some great caches in those areas.

[AZcachemeister]

Neglect by CO and poor containers (wet, mouldy and cruddy inside)

 

Yes - poorly maintained, cheap leaky cache containers and

• unattractive locations (e.g. parking lots, dumping grounds)
• bad coordinates (sometimes obtained using Google Maps/Google Earth)
• bad coordinates, on purpose because it's more fun that way
• caches placed just to up the numbers, no regard for the finder's caching experience (every smiley is a good smiley}
• caches with poorly written cache descriptions - poor grammar, spelling mistakes, no punctuation or capitals (never saw one of these that resulted in a great caching experience)
• a hint that says "email me for a hint"
• improper Difficulty/Terrain ratings (e.g. terrain is a 2 but cache is 12 feet up a tree)
• new COs that get billigerent in their cache notes instead of apologizing and fixing a problem (usually happens when private property issues are pointing out by finders)
• micro caches where a larger swag size cache will fit

 

For me it's the location. Mundane or unappealing places like parking lots, loading docks, litter strewn urban lots, median strips, guardrails along a non-descript section of road.

 

A poor container will also detract from the quality of the cache as far as I'm concerned but I'd rather find a lousy container in a cool area than an ammo box next to a dumpster.

 

These replies pretty much cover it.

 

Personally I like a trek that starts with a 12-15 mile drive where 4WD is absolutely needed followed by a 3-5 mile hike to a mountaintop where there is no trail.

 

Your Grandma may prefer a cache in a nice park with a view of the lake that she can find on her way to bingo at the church.

 

And everything in between.

 

As I have written many times before, if it's a place worth visiting even if there were no cache there, then it's a GOOD place for a cache.

[+ChileHead]

Almost anywhere where you can still see pavement.

[4wheelin_fool]

A bad cache attracts police activity and sometimes gets taken down to the station. A good cache stays out of trouble, remains healthy, is well taken care of, and attracts positive karma.

[+fizzymagic]

The discussion on "No Hides Untill 100 finds" got me thinking. We've had the thread on what makes a good cache. I'm a relative noob & would like to know what you consider a "bad" cache.

 

Proximity to things like used needles, human excrement, rotting trash, homeless encampments, (yes, I have experienced caches within a few feet of all of the above).

 

Location in a place with zero to recommend it. Walmart parking lots spring to mind.

 

Caches hidden in poison oak bushes.

[Clan Riffster]

I would like to know what you consider a "bad" cache.

Hi Melissa, great question. By the simple act of asking, I can surmise that you plan on taking pride in your hides, and as such, you wish to hide caches that are above the norm. Kudos! For a somewhat comprehensive list of things that cam affect the quality of a cache, allow me to refer you to the text from one of my recently archived caches:

 

(from Websters)

Lame: [leym] adjective

 

1. pathetically lacking in force or effectiveness

3. weak; inadequate; unsatisfactory;

 

Because geocachers hail from such diversity, it is really difficult to quantify "Lameness" as related to caches. There really isn't any one characteristic that can guarantee that a cache is lame, (other than hiding a film canister in a lamp post at Wally World, which is ALWAYS Lame), however a cache's Lameness Quotient can still be measured, given sufficient consideration, as follows:

 

Location

The motto for Groundspeak is "The Language of Location". This, more than anything, should be your first clue in determining if your cache is a stinker. Ask yourself, "Why am I bringing people to this spot?" If the only answer you can come up with is yet another mindless smiley, perhaps it's time to rethink ground zero. A waterfall is good. 500 acres of sweltering, exhaust laden blacktop filled with soccer moms in SUV's is bad.

 

Container Selection

The purpose of a cache is to protect its contents. Whether those contents are a slip of paper covered with the initials of a bunch of geo-nerds, or the contents are high dollar, really kewl swag, is really immaterial. If the container won't protect what's inside, it is lame. Quality containers include ammo cans, Lock & Locks, waterproof match containers and bison tubes. Inadequate containers include Gladware, black & gray film canisters, hide-a-keys, Altoid tins and duct tape covered baggies. These may work great indoors, but they simply will not repel moisture once subjected to the whims of Mother Nature.

 

Hide Style

If a hide style gets copied too often, it automatically becomes lame. Hide-a-keys on guard rails and film canisters under lamp posts require absolutely no imagination to hide or to find, and therefor earn pretty high LQ points. Any hide style that encourages vandalism or otherwise violate Groundspeak's guidelines, (graffiti coords/affixing electrical boxes to structures/buried caches/etc), are bad for the game, and should be avoided like the plague. Some of the best hides utilize subtle misdirection, getting folks to look everywhere but where their GPSr's tell them to look. I consider that a good thing, as it forces me to fire up the ol' grey matter.

 

Write Up

Your cache page write up is the medium used to present your cache to the community. You should be proud of your cache, and let your cache page reflect that fact. If there are more words tattooed on Rosie O'Donnell's backside than in your write up, folks might get the impression that you don't care about your hide. A bit of history about your site, or some humorous anecdotes about yourself, seem to go over well with the caching community. On a similar note, spellcheck is your friend.

 

Hints

Your hint should actually help your fellow cacher find your cache. You can be blunt or creative, so long as the message is relevant. A sure fire way to create angst amongst your fellow cachers is to get them to struggle through 10 minutes of ROT-13, just to discern a hint like, "This one is too easy for a hint".

 

Results

If you see a high percentage of single sentence find logs on your cache page, that is a fairly reasonable indicator that your cache may be suffering from a lack of ingenuity. This trend becomes more pronounced if you see a lot of "TNLNSL" entries. At that point, your cache has reached a lameness critical mass, and should probably be put out of its misery.

 

Patience

Patience is a virtue, especially in geocaching. If you become immediately hooked on this game, (like we did), you may find yourself wanting to run right out and hide a cache, as a means of giving back to the community. My advice? Allow yourself the time to gather sufficient experience before creating your first hide. By far the greatest number of lame hides come from folks with more enthusiasm than experience. Hiding a cache is an art form, and even Da'Vinci needed lessons. When I teach newbies about caching, I always suggest that they find 100 caches before they consider their first hide. This number is entirely arbitrary, yet it accomplishes two things. First, it gives the new cacher a goal to reach, and second, it typically gives them a broad spectrum of cache styles to experience, broadening their horizons.

[+gsmX2]

Clan has given a great explanation of what constitutes a really good cache....one that would get a lot of favorites. And best of all, one that would be found even though it's clever and unique. Well done.

 

For me a bad hide is any hide (clever or not) that requires me to search aimlessly in a high muggle area or through vegetation, especially that with holly-like leaves (ouch ouch).

 

I am a numbers guy (both finding and hiding), so although I don't hide many lamp post caches, and I don't find them challenging at all, I don't consider them BAD. They are almost always in place, dry inside, and are usually THERE. And if they are gone, it's obvious they are gone, and one doesn't have to spend 20 minutes looking for something that isn't there. The same holds true for guard rail and transformer hides.

 

There are two types of caches that I will usually spend less than a minute on if I attempt at all. Newspaper stand hides and vegetation hides in neighborhoods. By there very nature, newspaper stands are put in high traffic areas; the vegehides in neighborhoods seem to get muggled a lot, so result in 20 minute searches with no chance of a find.

 

My hides lack creativity, but you'll probably find them; they will be dry inside (usually...even a lock-n-lock replaced upside down will leak) and for the most part are there. Over time, I have found that I like FINDING caches more than I like SEARCHING for caches...but that's just me.

[+Sol seaker]

Hides that require "stealth" because there are so many people around

 

Places that are right next to places where muggles come and hang out for hours without leaving, such as

Picnic tables or benches (or right next to these benches), playgrounds or ball parks.

 

Bad coordinates (often obtained with a cell phone)

 

Bad leaky containers that create moldy contents

 

awful locations near dumpsters, or in places with a lot of trash

 

Micros in the woods

 

Very public places with a lot of people around (did I say that?)Especially evil hides in public places that require you to be there for an hour searching with hundreds passing around you.

 

Private property with no permission listed on the cache page.

[+harbhippo]

Use an appropriate container in an appropriate location, make sure it won't leak, and your cache will be appreciated.

 

My #1 pet peeve is a cache hidden in a high traffic area with no redeeming value for its location. I don't mind LPC's, but can't they be placed in a part of the parking lot that's the most quiet?

 

I think location is the first thing to consider when placing a cache. Don't put them where they're likely to be muggled. Don't put them in unpleasant areas (dumpsters, stagnant ponds, homeless hangouts), and if you're going to place one in the woods, off the trail... don't place a micro.

[+ARHogFanz]

Thanks for all of the wonderful posts, everyone. I'm hoping to hide my first cache once we get moved in a month or so. Hopefully, by then, I'll be well past the 200 finds point (171 as of today) and can draw from this thread, as well as my favorite finds, to start placing caches. My goal is to place some easy but fun finds for the noobs and work up to some challenging caches for those who really enjoy the thrill of the hunt. For me, the number one thing I love about a cache is location, location, location. I don't mind a magnetic key holder if it's on a bridge with a gorgeous view or the bridge itself is something special. By the same token, a creative cache in a blah location just doesn't do it for me.

 

Thanks again for all the input! I truly appreciate it.

Melissa

[Clan Riffster]

I don't mind a magnetic key holder if it's on a bridge with a gorgeous view or the bridge itself is something special.

Kewl! We share some of the same aesthetics! Bridges can be pretty neat places. If you do go this route, I would suggest using a container that is waterproof. Hide-a-keys are nowhere near waterproof. A rather biased axiom I like to spread about is, "If you must use a baggie to protect your log, your cache container has already failed at a very basic level." If you acquire a quality micro container, (or any other size, for that matter), for the hypothetical bridge cache, it won't take too much effort to affix a rare earth magnet to the container. The only benefit to hide-a-keys is that they come with a magnet already attached. Other than that, they really suck.

 

Micro containers that have shown, over the years, to be reasonably successful at keeping logs dry are bison tubes from Bison Design, (not the el-cheapo knock offs coming in from China), those kinda clear film cans whose lid pop into the body, and, (my favorite), soda bottle reforms.

Edited July 11, 2011 by Clan Riffster

[+ARHogFanz]

Hubby & I are also volunteer firefighters (in addition to him being a soldier). For the past 4 years, the children & I have lived in my husband's home town. He & I have a great idea for a series of fire department related caches we'd love to do in this area (no nanos on firehydrants - we promise), since we have contacts on many of the departments. However, since the children & I are moving to join him soon, we've written the idea down and will hopefully use it in the future.

 

Thanks for the info about the containers. I had no idea about the actual Bison tubes (didn't realize there were knock-offs as well as the real thing). I'm seeing more of those around here. My experience with the hide-a-keys has also been that the magnets eventually fall out. I've often worried that the magnets were about to fall out & the cache would be lost (in some cases - no great loss).

[+St.Matthew]

What makes a bad cache?

 

Caches in neighborhoods (excluding those those which are on a porch, etc.). I'm talking about caches on a trees or signs or utility boxes in the middle of a neighborhood surrounded by 10 houses.

[+ryanr69]

Caches surrounded by known bad environments, like poison oak.

 

There is a difference between challenge (a rock cliff) and something that is designed to hurt you.

[jonnyblond]

to me there are no bad caches. if someone takes the time to go out and hide a cache easy or hard then thats just awesome. there all original finds to me because i like where it takes me.

[+Scubasonic]

The discussion on "No Hides Untill 100 finds" got me thinking. We've had the thread on what makes a good cache. I'm a relative noob & would like to know what you consider a "bad" cache.

 

Thanks!

Melissa

 

I would say my Number 1 complaint about what makes a bad cache are Bad Coordinates.

 

SS

[Allie McG]

Swamps. Mud. Mosquitos. Poison Ivy. Especially when the CO bypasses perfectly nice areas to hide a cache there.

 

Only if the CO fails to mention these in the description or attributes. If such obstacles are listed, then game on.

[+Dgwphotos]

Locations where an outsider or odd behavior would stand out, such as close to residental neighborhoods, or in the middle of a roundabout.

[+EdrickV]

The main thing I dislike is neglected caches. Wet logs are not a nice find. If you can't maintain a cache, don't place it. If you have one placed that you can't maintain any longer, see if someone else is interested in adopting it. If you decide to stop Geocaching altogether, either get people to adopt your caches or remove and archive them. If and when I place a cache, I intend (under normal circumstances) to be able to check on it at least once a month.

 

While I don't think lamp post caches are exactly bad, I do think they are overdone. My first one took a long time to find and amazed me and the others I was with, and was my first find period. (The others had given up searching by that point.) Now I'm guessing which lamp post it'll be in before getting out of the car, sometimes even just looking at Google Maps I can tell a cache is likely to be a lamp post cache.

 

I've actually seen some interesting caches that did require stealth and were tricky enough (at least for a newbie) that it took some time to find them. And to retrieve and replace them stealthily, to me, was part of the fun. (These were not lamp post caches by any means, but I think they were classified as micros.)

 

And while this ties into neglect, caches that have trackable items listed that have actually been missing for a long time is annoying. If you know a trackable item in your cache is not there, then you (or the owner) can mark it as missing so it won't show up in the cache inventory and thus in searches.

 

And one last note, remember that if someone posts a needs maintenance log on your cache, that attribute will stick around until you post a preformed maintenance log. I've seen caches with really really old need maintenance flags that never got unflagged.

[+A & J Tooling]

The Lamp post ones are my least favorite. Followed by guard rail and stop sign ones.

[+Borst68]

Swamps. Mud. Mosquitos. Poison Ivy. Especially when the CO bypasses perfectly nice areas to hide a cache there.

 

Only if the CO fails to mention these in the description or attributes. If such obstacles are listed, then game on.

 

I prefer the ones in mud, swamp and mosquito infested areas. I enjoy the challenge, the hike and often the scenery. Where I live, poison ivy is common everywhere there is an absence of asphalt. I really dislike the LPCs. I only grab those if I happen to be at that strip mall to patronize one of the businesses.

 

What makes a bad cache? Bad location and no maintenance are the two biggies in my book.

[+briansnat]

Swamps. Mud. Mosquitos. Poison Ivy. Especially when the CO bypasses perfectly nice areas to hide a cache there.

 

Only if the CO fails to mention these in the description or attributes. If such obstacles are listed, then game on.

 

I prefer the ones in mud, swamp and mosquito infested areas. I enjoy the challenge, the hike and often the scenery. Where I live, poison ivy is common everywhere there is an absence of asphalt. I really dislike the LPCs. I only grab those if I happen to be at that strip mall to patronize one of the businesses.

 

What makes a bad cache? Bad location and no maintenance are the two biggies in my book.

 

I'm not thrilled with caches placed in the middle of poison ivy patches without a way to get there without contacting it. I wonder what the CO was thinking. But mud and swamps and mosquitoes, some of the best caches I've ever found have those factors.

[+Bluespreacher]

I would like to know what you consider a "bad" cache.

Hi Melissa, great question. By the simple act of asking, I can surmise that you plan on taking pride in your hides, and as such, you wish to hide caches that are above the norm. Kudos! For a somewhat comprehensive list of things that cam affect the quality of a cache, allow me to refer you to the text from one of my recently archived caches:

 

(from Websters)

Lame: [leym] adjective

 

1. pathetically lacking in force or effectiveness

3. weak; inadequate; unsatisfactory;

 

Because geocachers hail from such diversity, it is really difficult to quantify "Lameness" as related to caches. There really isn't any one characteristic that can guarantee that a cache is lame, (other than hiding a film canister in a lamp post at Wally World, which is ALWAYS Lame), however a cache's Lameness Quotient can still be measured, given sufficient consideration, as follows:

 

Location

The motto for Groundspeak is "The Language of Location". This, more than anything, should be your first clue in determining if your cache is a stinker. Ask yourself, "Why am I bringing people to this spot?" If the only answer you can come up with is yet another mindless smiley, perhaps it's time to rethink ground zero. A waterfall is good. 500 acres of sweltering, exhaust laden blacktop filled with soccer moms in SUV's is bad.

 

Container Selection

The purpose of a cache is to protect its contents. Whether those contents are a slip of paper covered with the initials of a bunch of geo-nerds, or the contents are high dollar, really kewl swag, is really immaterial. If the container won't protect what's inside, it is lame. Quality containers include ammo cans, Lock & Locks, waterproof match containers and bison tubes. Inadequate containers include Gladware, black & gray film canisters, hide-a-keys, Altoid tins and duct tape covered baggies. These may work great indoors, but they simply will not repel moisture once subjected to the whims of Mother Nature.

 

Hide Style

If a hide style gets copied too often, it automatically becomes lame. Hide-a-keys on guard rails and film canisters under lamp posts require absolutely no imagination to hide or to find, and therefor earn pretty high LQ points. Any hide style that encourages vandalism or otherwise violate Groundspeak's guidelines, (graffiti coords/affixing electrical boxes to structures/buried caches/etc), are bad for the game, and should be avoided like the plague. Some of the best hides utilize subtle misdirection, getting folks to look everywhere but where their GPSr's tell them to look. I consider that a good thing, as it forces me to fire up the ol' grey matter.

 

Write Up

Your cache page write up is the medium used to present your cache to the community. You should be proud of your cache, and let your cache page reflect that fact. If there are more words tattooed on Rosie O'Donnell's backside than in your write up, folks might get the impression that you don't care about your hide. A bit of history about your site, or some humorous anecdotes about yourself, seem to go over well with the caching community. On a similar note, spellcheck is your friend.

 

Hints

Your hint should actually help your fellow cacher find your cache. You can be blunt or creative, so long as the message is relevant. A sure fire way to create angst amongst your fellow cachers is to get them to struggle through 10 minutes of ROT-13, just to discern a hint like, "This one is too easy for a hint".

 

Results

If you see a high percentage of single sentence find logs on your cache page, that is a fairly reasonable indicator that your cache may be suffering from a lack of ingenuity. This trend becomes more pronounced if you see a lot of "TNLNSL" entries. At that point, your cache has reached a lameness critical mass, and should probably be put out of its misery.

 

Patience

Patience is a virtue, especially in geocaching. If you become immediately hooked on this game, (like we did), you may find yourself wanting to run right out and hide a cache, as a means of giving back to the community. My advice? Allow yourself the time to gather sufficient experience before creating your first hide. By far the greatest number of lame hides come from folks with more enthusiasm than experience. Hiding a cache is an art form, and even Da'Vinci needed lessons. When I teach newbies about caching, I always suggest that they find 100 caches before they consider their first hide. This number is entirely arbitrary, yet it accomplishes two things. First, it gives the new cacher a goal to reach, and second, it typically gives them a broad spectrum of cache styles to experience, broadening their horizons.

 

I agree with all of this. So many of the caches near me (46219) are just not anything I care to visit. It is common to see micros hidden in areas full of trash. Much more than you could ever carry out. One rail-to-trails area has caches hidden near homeless camps amid trash. Please pay attention to the location before you hide a cache! Why are you sending a fellow cacher to this area? What's special about it? Who would want to search through trash behind a Best Buy?

 

Bluespreacher

[Clan Riffster]

to me there are no bad caches.

Didn't Monty Python do a skit along those same lines?

I seem to recall a Catholic kid's choir singing something along the lines of, "Every cache is sacred".

Or something like that...

[+Patricula]

Okay, I feel a lot better after reading this thread.

 

I was out hunting today and came back frustrated and irritated! Now I see that it isn't just me and that my anger seems justified. "Justified" may not be the right word...

 

Caches I've hunted for and failed to find:

- Micros in the woods surrounded by trash, hobo homes, thorns, and poison ivy

- Caches with meaningless descriptions like "I named this after a conversation I had when I placed it! Have fun!"

- Non-objective descriptions: Saying that it's in the obvious hiding place in the woods is meaningless unless you know where it is! They're all obvious places! COs should really try to look at their descriptions and placement from the hunters point of view! Owners come off like those annoying Trivial Pursuit* players who are always saying "Jeeez! This is SOOOO easy! How can you NOT know this!"

- Stupid hints. Stupid is a strong word, but when it's something like "Ha ha! I just made you translate this for nothing!" (http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GCZQR2) or just "This is easy. Look for it!" then stupid is an apt description.

 

sigh

I'll get over it, I suppose, and just appreciate the fact that these people are contributing to a hobby that usually gives me great joy. Glad I found this thread before I started a new one.

 

I'll also try not to whine as much in my DNF log posts.

 

* Does anyone still play Trivial Pursuit? Am I just showing my age with this reference?

[+5g]

He & I have a great idea for a series of fire department related caches we'd love to do in this area (no nanos on firehydrants - we promise)

 

I'd love for my TB to end up in one of your caches some day. Fire Bug

Edited September 1, 2011 by horseleach

[+Vater_Araignee]

For me it's the location. Mundane or unappealing places like parking lots, loading docks, litter strewn urban lots, median strips, guardrails along a non-descript section of road.

 

A poor container will also detract from the quality of the cache as far as I'm concerned but I'd rather find a lousy container in a cool area than an ammo box next to a dumpster.

Aw man you should have written it like:

 

For me it's the location.

 

Mundane or unappealing places like parking lots,

loading docks, litter strewn urban lots,

section of roads like median strips,

guardrails along the non-descript.

[+GeoBain]

Spoiler videos.

[+power69]

I don't mind LPC's, but can't they be placed in a part of the parking lot that's the most quiet?

nope. most likely theres already another film cannister in the quiet part.

[+power69]

Hubby & I are also volunteer firefighters (in addition to him being a soldier). For the past 4 years, the children & I have lived in my husband's home town. He & I have a great idea for a series of fire department related caches we'd love to do in this area (no nanos on firehydrants - we promise), since we have contacts on many of the departments. However, since the children & I are moving to join him soon, we've written the idea down and will hopefully use it in the future.

 

Thanks for the info about the containers. I had no idea about the actual Bison tubes (didn't realize there were knock-offs as well as the real thing). I'm seeing more of those around here. My experience with the hide-a-keys has also been that the magnets eventually fall out. I've often worried that the magnets were about to fall out & the cache would be lost (in some cases - no great loss).

hydrant hides should be disallowed.

try explaining to joe homeowner his house burned to the ground because a nano geocache that was on the hydrant got inside the truck and jammed the impellar!

[+terrkan78]

Okay, I feel a lot better after reading this thread.

 

I was out hunting today and came back frustrated and irritated! Now I see that it isn't just me and that my anger seems justified. "Justified" may not be the right word...

 

Caches I've hunted for and failed to find:

- Micros in the woods surrounded by trash, hobo homes, thorns, and poison ivy

- Caches with meaningless descriptions like "I named this after a conversation I had when I placed it! Have fun!"

- Non-objective descriptions: Saying that it's in the obvious hiding place in the woods is meaningless unless you know where it is! They're all obvious places! COs should really try to look at their descriptions and placement from the hunters point of view! Owners come off like those annoying Trivial Pursuit* players who are always saying "Jeeez! This is SOOOO easy! How can you NOT know this!"

- Stupid hints. Stupid is a strong word, but when it's something like "Ha ha! I just made you translate this for nothing!" (http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GCZQR2) or just "This is easy. Look for it!" then stupid is an apt description.

 

sigh

I'll get over it, I suppose, and just appreciate the fact that these people are contributing to a hobby that usually gives me great joy. Glad I found this thread before I started a new one.

 

I'll also try not to whine as much in my DNF log posts.

 

* Does anyone still play Trivial Pursuit? Am I just showing my age with this reference?

 

I feel your pain. I was running about 30% DNFs for quite a while. Nothing worse than bushwhacking through poison oak and thorns only to DNF a cache with a useless hint. I know my irritation showed in some of my DNF logs. I stopped logging DNFs until a day or two later, when I could say something without sounding so irritated.

 

I figure the only thing I really can do to combat what I consider to be "bad" hides is to hide caches the way I enjoy. For me that means a short hike, a relatively easy find, a hint that tells you where to look and a write-up that's had some thought go into it (the icing on the cake is if the cache has some kind of "gimmick").

 

I have an unopened 1980s Trivial Pursuit in the closet left over from some Christmas.