Jump to content

How did these get approval?


jochta

Recommended Posts

A series of 61 micros.

 

#1 http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=e270b817-b958-4520-9bc6-7924fe4d909c

 

The owner hasn't given any details at all on any of the other 60 (I've not looked at them all). Not even a link back to the 1st. Is at least something not required before approval?

 

#13 http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4aff5605-920b-4ee6-a1f9-1e8581e50811

 

I assume he has sought and got landowner permission for all 61? But why does it need 61? Must be a nightmare to maintain. There doesn't appear to much information on the area, what to see, what to expect (other than unfriendly dogs).

 

This sort of thing is exactly what is killing geocaching for me. All a bit pointless. In the old days this would have been one multicache or offset cache.

 

John

Edited by jochta
Link to comment

Just because they are published doesn't mean you have to seek them.

 

Agreed. And I probably won't!

 

As for what you may encounter on the walk, well if you walk it you'll find out what is there, why do you need someone to point it out to you.

 

Clean cache pages make it easier for CO maintenance and who will read 61 individual or reproduced pages before a trek. :)

 

Depends which end of the walk you approach them on. If I set my smartphone to show me the nearest few caches and I'm nowhere near #1 I will just get a blank page.

 

I agree it's horses for courses. What floats my boat won't necessarily float the next person's :)

 

John

Link to comment

If a cache meets the guidelines it gets published. The page on how to submit a cache only says this:

Write a description that attracts geocachers to your location, including images of interest.

It doesn't say you MUST write a description B)

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

Link to comment

If a cache meets the guidelines it gets published. The page on how to submit a cache only says this:

Write a description that attracts geocachers to your location, including images of interest.

It doesn't say you MUST write a description B)

 

It doesn't say "You may write a description..." though. It says "Write a description...". Sounds like an instruction to be carried out to me ;)

 

A link back to the first might be a bare minimum as a courtesy to those coming across them in a listing. I can understand that that requires manually editing 60 pages and the subsequent maintenance requirement, but if you want to set 61 nearly identical caches then it seems reasonable that there's some pain involved :)

 

John

Edited by jochta
Link to comment

A series of 61 micros.

In the old days this would have been one multicache or offset cache.

A 61-stage multi? I don't think so <_<.

 

The countryside around Compton is lovely and I'm sure I'll be walking this series when the weather improves and the days lengthen.

 

I do agree that a blank cache page isn't very inspiring or useful.

Link to comment

Just because they are published doesn't mean you have to seek them.

 

Agreed. And I probably won't!

 

As for what you may encounter on the walk, well if you walk it you'll find out what is there, why do you need someone to point it out to you.

 

Clean cache pages make it easier for CO maintenance and who will read 61 individual or reproduced pages before a trek. :)

 

Depends which end of the walk you approach them on. If I set my smartphone to show me the nearest few caches and I'm nowhere near #1 I will just get a blank page.

 

I agree it's horses for courses. What floats my boat won't necessarily float the next person's :)

 

John

 

Just like the cache setter has an option how he promotes the caches, you also have options on how to seek them.

 

GPS

Maps

Smartphone

Join a group

Link to comment

Not too far from Oxford then, where I'll be in July this year.

 

I did have a look at the series, and although details would be nice, I have to admit when doing a large power trail like this, especially when the cache page is a repeat of the first page, I don't look at the cache page very often as I'm more concerned with completing the trail as quick as I can. I would look at the clue and if I'm searching with no luck, I would then look at previous logs and the cache description for any more help.

 

At the end of the day, this series might be a lovely walk, and you won't know until you've done it. I felt that the CO put enough info on No. 1 that it's about what I'd expect in a power trail, although I'd keep my fingers crossed not to encounter the dog!!

Link to comment

I'm not entirely sure what the problem is.

 

  • It's boring.
  • It lacks creativity.
  • It's homogenous.
  • The containers are usually cheap leaky containers, something free like film canisters or pill pots.
  • Almost always micro so people who like to trade trackables or swag can't enjoy that aspect of the game.
  • They rarely get maintained, logs fill up fast and it's too difficult to keep up with the work of replacing them.
  • PTs encourage people to place throwdowns so they can get their smiley
  • PTs encourage leap-frogging.
  • It's all about the coveted smiley, otherwise why wouldn't a multi suffice?
  • It's selfish - one CO monopolizes a whole countryside walking trail for miles.

Link to comment

I'm not entirely sure what the problem is.

 

  • It's boring.
  • It lacks creativity.
  • It's homogenous.
  • The containers are usually cheap leaky containers, something free like film canisters or pill pots.
  • Almost always micro so people who like to trade trackables or swag can't enjoy that aspect of the game.
  • They rarely get maintained, logs fill up fast and it's too difficult to keep up with the work of replacing them.
  • PTs encourage people to place throwdowns so they can get their smiley
  • PTs encourage leap-frogging.
  • It's all about the coveted smiley, otherwise why wouldn't a multi suffice?
  • It's selfish - one CO monopolizes a whole countryside walking trail for miles.

 

How do you know its boring? Have you done this walk?

Link to comment

I'm not entirely sure what the problem is.

 

  • It's boring.
  • It lacks creativity.
  • It's homogenous.
  • The containers are usually cheap leaky containers, something free like film canisters or pill pots.
  • Almost always micro so people who like to trade trackables or swag can't enjoy that aspect of the game.
  • They rarely get maintained, logs fill up fast and it's too difficult to keep up with the work of replacing them.
  • PTs encourage people to place throwdowns so they can get their smiley
  • PTs encourage leap-frogging.
  • It's all about the coveted smiley, otherwise why wouldn't a multi suffice?
  • It's selfish - one CO monopolizes a whole countryside walking trail for miles.

 

How do you know its boring? Have you done this walk?

 

The PT geocaching experience is boring. I'm not commenting on the walk. But the site is geocaching.com not hiking.com or countrywalks.com. Granted the pleasant environment is a bonus and important to the whole package of the geocaching experience. If I'm looking for a lovely walk in the countryside, stopping every .1 (or .29) miles for a leaky micro is not going to enhance that experience.

Link to comment

This morning myself and TurnerTribe headed off to the Badger series. We were joined part way round by Misty's Musketeers.

I have to say, this was an excellent walk and one that we all thoroughly enjoyed. A lot of time and effort has gone into creating this series.

 

Plus points for us (no particular order and from the 40/61 we found today):

Several Starting points all with easy parking

Easy to follow route

No livestock

A mixture of cache containers from test tubes to small (beaker size) to 'novelty' hides.

Decoy caches added that extra fun factor.

Very buggy-able in that there weren't any stiles or kissing gates to lug the buggy over.

Great views

No sight of the dogs mentioned on the cache page

Caches not every 0.1miles

Variety of terrain.

Tractors, diggers and excavators for my 2 year old to watch.

 

Negative points

The layout of the series means a long (2 mile) dog-leg section

It was dadgum cold today!

 

This was a series where I will dole out quite a few favourite points. It's well worth the trip over.

Link to comment

Not quite sure what Solitario's beef is here. I see that he has more posts to his name on the forum than he has caches found, maybe that's a telling statistic. Caching is priority No.2, complaining priority No.1, possibly??

 

No-one's asking you to do the walk yourself, Solitario, but there will be plenty of people (myself included), who would be more than happy to walk this series. Stop trying to make our minds up for us.

Link to comment

I think it's a bit poor to have left every cache page blank except the first one. As the OP says even if there was just a link back to #1 on each page that would be useful. However the info re the dogs and the busy road should be on the cache pages that they're relevant to, particularly as they are safety related details.

 

It sounds like this may be a good series from the "The QCs" feedback, however I think it's been let down by the blank pages which would probably have put me off right from the start.

Link to comment

If I lived nearby I'd happily go for a Badger walk.

I'd thanks the CO for letting me in on the possible dog situation.

I thank the QC's for their valuable opinion on the series.

And since the OP is hardly an experienced cacher I wouldn't have taken much notice on his/her negativity.

I may be inexperience myself, but I say as I see.

 

Are you taking my total number of caches found as experience? That is a poor judge of experience. True, I don't cache as much as I used to mainly due to the countryside being littered with thousands of thoughtless micros which has spoiled the sport for me; it's becoming harder and harder to sort the wheat from the chaff. All most cachers care about nowadays it seems is that total number. I don't mind micros, I've set a few myself, but when they are just placed for the sake of placing a cache with no noteworthy features whatsoever then I do mind, that isn't enjoyable for me. The sport is a very different beast to how it was 10 years ago IMO. That doesn't necessarily mean it's bad, clearly many cachers like the sport as it is today, it's just less my cup of tea than it was.

 

I am/was more discerning in the caches that I set and seek which doesn't make me any less experienced. I still have great caching experiences, just fewer of them now.

 

My original beef in the OP was the lack of info on 60 of 61 of these caches and it seems several agree with me. Yes, I don't agree with setting 61 cache power trails, it sounds horrid to me but if that's your bag, have fun. I'll be interested to see how many of the 61 are still surviving this time next year, it seems at least one of them may have gone AWOL already.

 

John

Edited by jochta
Link to comment

Not quite sure what Solitario's beef is here. I see that he has more posts to his name on the forum than he has caches found, maybe that's a telling statistic. Caching is priority No.2, complaining priority No.1, possibly??

 

No-one's asking you to do the walk yourself, Solitario, but there will be plenty of people (myself included), who would be more than happy to walk this series. Stop trying to make our minds up for us.

 

Woman, not a guy. Been caching since Christmas Eve 2001 (under our team account - got a separate account in 2006). I do not geocache for the numbers, thus the discrepancy in my low cache count compared to 11 years of forum posts. I have seen what PTs have done (and are doing) to this past time. I was not so much commenting on this particular PT but on PTs in general and understand the OP's frustration.

 

That being said, there are a very few number of PTs out there that deserve praise for being well planned, and placed by COs that want to create a great experience. They put some money into the caches by purchasing watertight caches. They don't plant every .1 miles but rather find appropriate spots along the trail that show off a nice place. They quickly attend to problems that arise. This may be one of those rare few.

Edited by Solitario R
Link to comment

I'm not a numbers man but I'm just back from walking the whole series today.

 

Some take some looking for and even the simply hidden ones are sometimes elusive.

 

It's not a power trail and the distances between allow plenty of scope for adjusting the hides if it becomes necessary.

 

The dog at the farm barked once and after one word from the owner it was totally quiet and docile. How many dogs out for walkies can you say that about.

 

My only criticism is the title structure I would have liked to see a short code and the number at the beginning, it's so much easier to follow on the GPSr.

 

I will admit to being an old fool and walking down the road. I've lived to tell the tale but like the CO I'm not recommending it.

 

As said at the beginning I only occasionally do cache series but I was quite content with my day of exercise. :D

Link to comment

Not quite sure what Solitario's beef is here. I see that he has more posts to his name on the forum than he has caches found, maybe that's a telling statistic. Caching is priority No.2, complaining priority No.1, possibly??

 

No-one's asking you to do the walk yourself, Solitario, but there will be plenty of people (myself included), who would be more than happy to walk this series. Stop trying to make our minds up for us.

 

Woman, not a guy. Been caching since Christmas Eve 2001 (under our team account - got a separate account in 2006). I do not geocache for the numbers, thus the discrepancy in my low cache count compared to 11 years of forum posts. I have seen what PTs have done (and are doing) to this past time. I was not so much commenting on this particular PT but on PTs in general and understand the OP's frustration.

 

That being said, there are a very few number of PTs out there that deserve praise for being well planned, and placed by COs that want to create a great experience. They put some money into the caches by purchasing watertight caches. They don't plant every .1 miles but rather find appropriate spots along the trail that show off a nice place. They quickly attend to problems that arise. This may be one of those rare few.

 

I feel that there is a significant difference between a North American power trail and a circular walk in the British countryside. Only time will tell but I'm a great believer in actually doing a cache or series and then providing my views rather than exporting criticism from another continent.

 

I am also a great believer in that any game/pastime that gets people/families out walking in the countryside together, having fun is absolutley essential and should never be criticised.

 

I do agree, however that even in a large series each cache ought to have some form of information regarding the area even if it is only an abbreviated/slightly amended copy of the first page. I also hope that the CO has factored in the level of commitment and time that this sort of trail will need, again, only time will tell.

Link to comment

I think that the point that Legochugglers makes about the difference between N American "power trails" and walks in the UK is very relevant. On another recent thread, Solitario is enthusiastic about a fellow Canadian cacher who is proposing a series along The Great Western Cattle Trail, maybe 30 miles in length, with anything between 35 and 70 caches. This trail is referred to in the topic heading as a "History Geotrail".

 

Now, the one thing that we do better than most in the UK is history. It's everywhere! I'd hazard a guess that many of our "walks" here could be similarly categorised as a History Geotrail. So, the chances are that, on any walk in the UK, you will see places of historical interest, old buildings / grand houses etc etc - we tend to take these things for granted I suppose, but it's a fact that many countries can't offer the same level of interest as can be found here. The chances of a walk being "boring", even if some people prefer not to have 3 - 4 caches per mile, is, I would suggest, slim (though admittedly, there is always the exception to the rule, mainly because of the attitude of many of our citizens to the scattering of rubbish wherever they like)

Link to comment

Really enjoyable series, and in my opinion is exactly what people want... a long walk in the countryside without having to move the car.

 

As for 'in the old days this would have been a multi'... what utter garbage! Show me 61 wp multi! hahaha keep taking the medicine.

Link to comment

Really enjoyable series, and in my opinion is exactly what people want... a long walk in the countryside without having to move the car.

 

Glad you enjoyed it. It isn't exactly what everyone wants from geocaching though IMO.

 

As for 'in the old days this would have been a multi'... what utter garbage! Show me 61 wp multi! hahaha keep taking the medicine.

 

I answered this already. I doubt very much that all 61 would be required to be waypoints to make it a multi.

 

John

Link to comment

Let me put it another way then... an 18 mile multi? I don't think so :-))

 

What's wrong with an 18 mile multi? I own a 13 mile multi and I have done a 20+ mile multi in the past. It's one of the best caches I've ever done.biggrin.gif

 

20 miles for 1 cache? :blink:

 

It's a good job we are all different and like different things.

And why I like caching: we can all 'choose' to go for the caches we like doing. :rolleyes:

And for this reason, I just don't understand why people moan about various caches.

 

It's been said time & time again:

If you don't like micros ... dont do them.

If you don't like big trails ... dont do them.

If you don't like puzzles & 'long' multi's ... dont do them.

Simples! :ph34r:

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...
×
×
  • Create New...