Jump to content

Nano's need for an icon ?


lock1uk
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

As a total newcomer the nanos are a little off-putting to me but I do intend to try them out as there are some in my area.

 

I guess personally I'd like to see some sort of unwritten rule that if you're hiding a nano then you should consider how many nanos/micros are already in the surrounding areas so as not to swamp the area with ultra difficult (and possibly child unfriendly) caches. Maybe people already bear this in mind, I don't know, I'm still learning the ropes :D

Edited by derbygeonoob
Link to comment
we should be able to see what type of cache it is. that why we are asking for an icon for a nano.

 

Actually, what I see are a lot of people asking for is a cache size, not an icon. Icons are used to distinguish cache types, not cache sizes. Even if a nano size is introduced, they will still have the same icon as they do now.

 

Personally, I'm OK with the existing setup -- a nano is a Micro and should be listed as such. If people can't read the definitions now and pick the right cache size from the dropdown list I don't think giving them even more choices will help.

 

Those who label their nanos as an "Other" size are typically doing it for one of two reasons:

 

- They want to hide the fact that it is a Micro so it doesn't get filtered out

- They were too lazy to read even the most basic guidelines

 

Those who do it for the first reason will continue to do so. Those who do it for the second reason will continue to be lazy too.

 

For the second situation I like to educate cache owners. If I see a Other size listed and the cache listing describes it as a nano, I'll typically mention in my logs that the CO should consider properly listing the size as Micro.

 

My view on this might be different from the majority because in our area I don't typically see the Other category being used for nanos. Typically I see it being used in a case like a film canister glued into the bottom of a piggy bank or something -- it only holds swag like a micro but you hunt for it like a regular.

Link to comment

I've found a few nanos, but they are few and far between indeed (and I don't just cache in my local area). I'm not particularly keen on them, but if I notice in a cache description that I'll be looking for a nano I'll still have a go if it looks an interesting hide in some way; otherwise I'll probably give it a miss in the same way as I'd miss any size of container if the cache doesn't look of interest.

 

I'm not sure why some people experience a significant problem with nanos. Before worrying about whether an icon would be helpful, I wonder why someone should go to a typical spot such as woodland or a lane with hedges, or a hilly footpath, or rocky moorland, and then hide a nano. IIRC I've never even seen a nano in such a spot and I've found over 500 caches this year. I've hidden one in woodland but it was inside an ammo box and proved quite popular (with those that noticed it!).

 

Perhaps the question should be addressed to your local geocaching forum as it sounds like one or two cache hiders getting carried away with inappropriate containers. I don't see it as a widespread problem.

Link to comment
http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/1051741-make-a-nano-cache-size-option

 

Jeremy's reply (10 months ago) says it's a straightforward thing to add, but they don't want to break third-party applications. They've released how many updates since January, that have had a bigger effect on third party applications than adding a nano size?

 

It reads more like, "here, I'll say we plan to do this so that you users will shut up about it and we can continue to focus on the stuff we think is cool."

To me it reads more like, "Making the change is easy. Making the change in a way that doesn't break our business partners' software will not be easy and fast."

 

It looks like they chose "easy and slow" over "difficult and fast". I can't say I blame them, especially given that the "difficult and fast" option probably includes some pretty ugly hacks.

 

But I'm not privy to Groundspeak's internal discussions about such things, so what do I know?

Link to comment
http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/1051741-make-a-nano-cache-size-option

 

Jeremy's reply (10 months ago) says it's a straightforward thing to add, but they don't want to break third-party applications. They've released how many updates since January, that have had a bigger effect on third party applications than adding a nano size?

 

It reads more like, "here, I'll say we plan to do this so that you users will shut up about it and we can continue to focus on the stuff we think is cool."

To me it reads more like, "Making the change is easy. Making the change in a way that doesn't break our business partners' software will not be easy and fast."

 

It looks like they chose "easy and slow" over "difficult and fast". I can't say I blame them, especially given that the "difficult and fast" option probably includes some pretty ugly hacks.

 

But I'm not privy to Groundspeak's internal discussions about such things, so what do I know?

I also fail to see the problem with tptb prioritizing their work. IF they are working on higher priority issues and this has caused them to push a nano-size back a little while, what's the big deal?

Link to comment

whats the big deal, well u go to a cache with stuff to swap and when you get to it its the size of you finger tip, you do get piss off some what. so it would be good to know what size of cache you are going to and small is not a nano. as most put on there cache small and its a nano.

Link to comment

whats the big deal, well u go to a cache with stuff to swap and when you get to it its the size of you finger tip, you do get piss off some what. so it would be good to know what size of cache you are going to and small is not a nano. as most put on there cache small and its a nano.

Why would you go to a micro and expect swaps?

I've never seen a cache described as "small" turn out to be a nano. If you find one, I'd recommend posting a "needs maintenance" log.

Link to comment

whats the big deal, well u go to a cache with stuff to swap and when you get to it its the size of you finger tip, you do get piss off some what. so it would be good to know what size of cache you are going to and small is not a nano. as most put on there cache small and its a nano.

Thats to keep you from filtering it out.

Link to comment

I always list them as "other", & then in the short description, I always write "a nano". I figure that way, nobody's confused.

 

But why not list them as 'micro' and in the description write "a nano".

 

Is it so that those people who like micros but don't like nanos can filter out nanos by filtering out "other"?

Link to comment

And I get really aggravated at hide-a-keys & Altoids tins being listed as smalls. To me, they can fit very little to no swag ..they are MICROS. If I can't fit a normal travel dog tag attached to a normal-sized keychain-like object in there, your cache is a micro.

 

You can put a camera in an altoid tin:

 

OptioS_AltoidTin.jpg

Link to comment

I always list them as "other", & then in the short description, I always write "a nano". I figure that way, nobody's confused.

 

But why not list them as 'micro' and in the description write "a nano".

 

Is it so that those people who like micros but don't like nanos can filter out nanos by filtering out "other"?

To be honest- it's how we learned. That's how they did it in WNC quite a bit, so that's how we learned to do it. However, I can also say that it's much less confusing for newbs too. When we didn't know what nanos were, when we saw "other", but then the description "nano", we knew to ask.. some poor souls are out there without knowing to ask, looking for an Altoids tin...because it says "micro".

Link to comment

And I get really aggravated at hide-a-keys & Altoids tins being listed as smalls. To me, they can fit very little to no swag ..they are MICROS. If I can't fit a normal travel dog tag attached to a normal-sized keychain-like object in there, your cache is a micro.

 

You can put a camera in an altoid tin:

 

OptioS_AltoidTin.jpg

I'd love to find a camera in an Altoids tin! ...oh, wait.. anything I tried to trade for it wouldn't fit in the tin. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Quite a few "smalls" today are pill bottles that can't even hold a geocoin because the opening is too small. But the cache owners won't call them micros, because to them, the nano has become the standard size for a "micro" specification. And because tiny pill bottles have become the new "small", sandwich-size containers are now called "regular".

 

We haven't seen ant regulars smaller than 1qt/1L. That seems reasonable to me. The small v. micro discussion, however, is valid. Our rule of thumb is if a standard geocoin (1.75") can't fit, it's a micro. That's why they made the micro geocoin. That puts bottle pre-forms in the micro category. In fact, it would put a 2L bottle in the micro category. Personally, I think any regular size container with an opening that can't pass the geocoin test is a poor choice. I'm sure someone will post an example that is contrary, but I can't picture it.

Link to comment

And I get really aggravated at hide-a-keys & Altoids tins being listed as smalls. To me, they can fit very little to no swag ..they are MICROS. If I can't fit a normal travel dog tag attached to a normal-sized keychain-like object in there, your cache is a micro.

 

You can put a camera in an altoid tin:

 

OptioS_AltoidTin.jpg

I'd love to find a camera in an Altoids tin! ...oh, wait.. anything I tried to trade for it wouldn't fit in the tin. :rolleyes:

A $100 bill in a baggie would[remember trade even or up]

Link to comment

And I get really aggravated at hide-a-keys & Altoids tins being listed as smalls. To me, they can fit very little to no swag ..they are MICROS. If I can't fit a normal travel dog tag attached to a normal-sized keychain-like object in there, your cache is a micro.

 

You can put a camera in an altoid tin:

 

OptioS_AltoidTin.jpg

I'd love to find a camera in an Altoids tin! ...oh, wait.. anything I tried to trade for it wouldn't fit in the tin. :rolleyes:

A $100 bill in a baggie would[remember trade even or up]

lol OK. Or...I could go buy a new one that hasn't gotten wet. Just an option. :laughing:

Link to comment
http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/1051741-make-a-nano-cache-size-option

Jeremy's reply (10 months ago) says it's a straightforward thing to add, but they don't want to break third-party applications. They've released how many updates since January, that have had a bigger effect on third party applications than adding a nano size?

 

It reads more like, "here, I'll say we plan to do this so that you users will shut up about it and we can continue to focus on the stuff we think is cool."

To me it reads more like, "Making the change is easy. Making the change in a way that doesn't break our business partners' software will not be easy and fast."

 

It looks like they chose "easy and slow" over "difficult and fast". I can't say I blame them, especially given that the "difficult and fast" option probably includes some pretty ugly hacks.

But I'm not privy to Groundspeak's internal discussions about such things, so what do I know?

I also fail to see the problem with tptb prioritizing their work. IF they are working on higher priority issues and this has caused them to push a nano-size back a little while, what's the big deal?

It's apparently not a big priority. It appears to be a rather small one actually. Tiny even. Hmm, what's the word I'm thinking of...? :D

Link to comment

Our rule of thumb is if a standard geocoin (1.75") can't fit, it's a micro. That's why they made the micro geocoin. That puts bottle pre-forms in the micro category. In fact, it would put a 2L bottle in the micro category. Personally, I think any regular size container with an opening that can't pass the geocoin test is a poor choice.

 

+1

Link to comment

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...