Is it ok to lie about cache size?

June 29, 2012

I've been thinking about placing a micro on a large, permanently-situated shipping container. Is it fair or reasonable to list the container size as a large? One suggestion that was given to me was to list an unknown cache size, but say in the description that "You are looking for a large container."

I'm putting the question out there to get some more points of view...what do you think?

June 29, 2012

I've been thinking about placing a micro on a large, permanently-situated shipping container. Is it fair or reasonable to list the container size as a large? One suggestion that was given to me was to list an unknown cache size, but say in the description that "You are looking for a large container."

I'm putting the question out there to get some more points of view...what do you think?

I wouldn't and I think I'd be upset if someone did. If I see a LARGE container, I might plan on bringing along large trackables I've found since they'll never fit in a micro or a small. I'd be really disappointed to not unload the trackable plus I'd likely waste time at the GZ or just skip it since the large container is easy to dismiss as missing.

You might want to NAME the cache as "Large container" but give it a size of micro, that way people can interpret the name as a hint or location instead of a cache size.

2k · June 29, 2012

well..there is a way around that. I found this one really cool cache, it was listed as a micro. It was a bison container but it was hidden inside a huge treasure chest type thing. So, technically in that case, it would not be a lie to say micro. Yeah, you might have folks miss out on swag opportunities a bit, but it would not be a lie!

however, in your case, you are not placing it inside, so that would not exactly work.

Edited June 29, 2012 by lamoracke

June 29, 2012

I think the advice you got was clever. List the size as unknown. Saying that the seeker is looking for a large container is, in this case, like saying they are looking for a large stump or a large stone as a marker. Depending on the difficulty level you want to set, you might want to include a give-away hint though, or you will probably get a lot of logs that say "Found it Couldn't open container so I signed my name on the wall like everybody else TFTC"

1.1k · June 29, 2012

I've been thinking about placing a micro on a large, permanently-situated shipping container. Is it fair or reasonable to list the container size as a large? One suggestion that was given to me was to list an unknown cache size, but say in the description that "You are looking for a large container."

I'm putting the question out there to get some more points of view...what do you think?

In a word NO! I usually avoid micro's and would be upset to be looking for a large cache when it is a micro! I would list it as a micro, call it something like small on large and as a hint "Look for the large container".

38.2k · June 29, 2012

I'm not sure why you would want to lie about what people are searching for. I don't see deliberately misleading searchers as funny or cute. I know I'd be a bit annoyed if I'm spending my time looking for a large and the container is really a micro.

6.7k · June 29, 2012

I have to agree with Briansnat on this one. Intentionally misleading people is just plain nasty. It certainly isn't clever.

And please, make sure you have permission for the hide. I'd really hate to be confronted by someone who thinks I'm trying to break in to their storage container.

June 29, 2012

While looking for the large container I found what looks to be an old micro so I CITOd it. But I didnt find your cache.

7.8k · June 29, 2012

While looking for the large container I found what looks to be an old micro so I CITOd it. But I didnt find your cache.

Yep, if you do "lie about the cache size", be prepared to receive a lot of NMs and messages from confused cachers.

"I couldn't find any spots around that big shipping container where you could hide a large. Are you sure your coordinates are correct?"

June 29, 2012

While looking for the large container I found what looks to be an old micro so I CITOd it. But I didnt find your cache.

:laughing:

1.1k · June 29, 2012

I tried to put a micro, INSIDE an ammo, and list it as micro !!

many did not find the real cache, and they did not find the log book,

so they think the log is missing, and put down a new log,

lesson lerned !! it is a BAD idea to play funny tricks..

June 29, 2012

Bad idea, for all the reasons already stated.

2.6k · June 29, 2012

I think I'd go with the Unknown cache size. I'd much rather have the challenge of not knowing exactly what I'm looking for vs. being told that it's one thing when it's actually something else.

7.3k · June 29, 2012

I've been thinking about placing a micro on a large, permanently-situated shipping container. Is it fair or reasonable to list the container size as a large? One suggestion that was given to me was to list an unknown cache size, but say in the description that "You are looking for a large container."

I'm putting the question out there to get some more points of view...what do you think?

I don't think it's a very good idea at all.

This is a lame way to up the "difficulty" of finding a cache, much like purposely posting coordinates that are off.

It's frustrating enough to find caches large enough to move travel bugs and coins. To be misled, on purpose, by the cache owner would be very aggravating.

Posting it as "unknown" size is fine. Then I know to expect something different. But to willfully mislead people by adding "You are looking for a large container" is just ignorant.

B.

3.3k · June 29, 2012

A cache description is a contract between the hider and finder. One of those stipulations regards cache maintenance. Another is about truth. You can mislead people all you want, such as saying they're looking for an ammo can and, all the while, you have a micro size ammo can hidden while the finder assumes s/he is looking for a regular size one. That's fine because you're not saying anything that isn't true. However, blatant lies on the cache description, including the size, will cause people not to trust anything you write. This can lead to unfortunate situations, such as finders looking in dangerous places like electrical boxes when you warn not to look there due to a loose wire. It's like crying wolf.

I knew of someone who would intentionally post inaccurate coordinates. His reasoning was he didn't want to make it too easy for people to find his caches. You can imagine the headaches and gripes he caused. In my opinion, if you want to increase a cache's difficulty and get some respect, hide the largest possible cache in the most creative way--and not sixty feet up a tree, either.

I agree with the general sentiment here. If you do not want people aware of the cache's size, please do not specify it.

Whatever you decide to do, this overrides everything else I've said: make the entire experience enjoyable for the finder. If, to accomplish this, it requires you to lie on the cache description for an obvious reason, so be it as long as it doesn't introduce an element of needless stress.

June 29, 2012

Thank you all for your responses. I appreciate the feedback and will use it going forward.

1.6k · June 29, 2012

If you think giving the correct size will be too easy a find, make the size unknown. You should not lie in the cache listing.

14k · June 29, 2012

Whatever you decide to do, this overrides everything else I've said: make the entire experience enjoyable for the finder.

That's a nice goal but it's probably unlikely that you're going to make the entire experience for *every* finder (or, more accurately, seeker) of the cache. Some people may actually enjoy finding a cache 60' up in a tree. Some people might enjoy a 10 mile hike to a cache and some people won't. Even if a fairly significant number of people might not enjoy a certain type of hide, that shouldn't mean it should not be placed, as long as the difficulty/terrain ratings are accurate. The key, to me, is to provide enough information on the cache page that will allow a potential finder to determine if it's the kind of cache that they would. It's okay to be surprised every once in awhile but there are good surprises, and bad surprises.

June 29, 2012

If you really want to make a up a lie, just do not even leave a cache, and list it as a 5 star to find...when people continue to get DNF, just say you checked yep its still there....

6.7k · June 29, 2012

If you really want to make a up a lie, just do not even leave a cache, and list it as a 5 star to find...when people continue to get DNF, just say you checked yep its still there....

I don't want to get the admin brick tossed at me so I won't tell you what I think of that idea.

June 29, 2012

If you really want to make a up a lie, just do not even leave a cache, and list it as a 5 star to find...when people continue to get DNF, just say you checked yep its still there....

I don't want to get the admin brick tossed at me so I won't tell you what I think of that idea.

It's only sarcasm

3k · June 29, 2012

Thank you all for your responses. I appreciate the feedback and will use it going forward.

Are you by any chance in Marketing? :laughing:

Seriously, and strictly out of curiosity, does this mean you will, or will not, be listing a micro as a large? :unsure:

June 30, 2012

Thank you all for your responses. I appreciate the feedback and will use it going forward.

Are you by any chance in Marketing?

Seriously, and strictly out of curiosity, does this mean you will, or will not, be listing a micro as a large?

Nah, I'm not in marketing...just diplomatic. This thread was more controversial than I would have imagined, but I was thinking outside the box a bit and playing with some ideas that apparently aren't so popular. It was really more of a thought experiment, but I figured I'd get some good ideas.

My ultimate plan is to list an unknown cache size and mention in the description something like "You're looking for a large container. The cache will be nearby." FWIW, it's not a standard shipping container, but rather a small office building made of recycled containers. I absolutely plan on obtaining permission for an on-premises hide, but if that's a no-go, I have an alternate, public spot.

3.6k · June 30, 2012

While looking for the large container I found what looks to be an old micro so I CITOd it. But I didnt find your cache.

Amen!

5.6k · June 30, 2012

Thank you all for your responses. I appreciate the feedback and will use it going forward.

Are you by any chance in Marketing?

Seriously, and strictly out of curiosity, does this mean you will, or will not, be listing a micro as a large?

Nah, I'm not in marketing...just diplomatic. This thread was more controversial than I would have imagined, but I was thinking outside the box a bit and playing with some ideas that apparently aren't so popular. It was really more of a thought experiment, but I figured I'd get some good ideas.

My ultimate plan is to list an unknown cache size and mention in the description something like "You're looking for a large container. The cache will be nearby." FWIW, it's not a standard shipping container, but rather a small office building made of recycled containers. I absolutely plan on obtaining permission for an on-premises hide, but if that's a no-go, I have an alternate, public spot.

Maybe something like this cache?

2k · June 30, 2012

I wonder if the people that lie about the size of their caches, also lie about the size of ... other things?

Seems like a bad idea. That's what the "no size given" size is for - to keep it unknown till you get there.

June 30, 2012

Just to reinforce this, I found a micro yesterday which was advertised as a Medium - in a tree and all. I guess I was quite lucky to find it as I really was looking for a camp bag or something.

Today someone else looked for it and recorded a DNF - it was the only one on the walk of 9 which was miles out in terms of cache size, although the coords seemed pretty sound to me. It's a new series with only three searchers so far, but this is the only DNF out of them - I'm thinking the unreliable cache size is part of the issue here.

Fwiw if I do find one I disagree about the size over then I'll put it in my log. Always. So even if someone did tell porkys about the size of the container deliberately I reckon they'd be having to delete an awful lot of logs - which would go down not so well I imagine.

June 30, 2012

It is not fair or reasonable to list a micro as a large.

One suggestion that was given to me was to list an unknown cache size, but say in the description that "You are looking for a large container."

When caches are listed as "unknown" size, I operate under the assumption that they are micros and the cache owner doesn't want to admit it. Weasel words like this in the description are not clever or humorous; they are intentionally deceptive.

I have encountered this situation. A hider listed a cache as a regular, when it would not even be regular-sized if you were a Barbie doll. And he said in the description that it was easy to find. I realized the second I got there that he was lying to seekers. To answer the question in your subtitle, I reacted angrily.

Smaller caches are more difficult to find. Representing a cache to people who haven't found it as three sizes larger than it is (four if GC.com ever implements "nano") is mean-spirited.

Put yourself in the searcher's shoes. Let's say a cache was listed as a large or unknown size, and you arrived only to see a military tank, a bridge, or an empty or locked shipping container. Would you be pleasantly surprised?

1.7k · June 30, 2012

Didn't find it

I couldn't find a single hiding spot that could hold a large besides the shipping container so you must have been mugged. I did find a cache stuck to the shipping container that must have been here and archived before your hide. I'm looking for a hiding place for it later today.

Needs maintenance log to follow.

Distance I had to travel or if you where willing to pay shipping depends on if you would get the cache back or not.

Well my mood would determine it too. If I was in a good mood when I found out I was lied to, no harm no foul, but if I am already stressed when I find out...

You might just get a video of me using the cache you caused me to abscond with as target practice to relieve that stress. :laughing: The use of three muscles relieves stress by 23.

2.4k · June 30, 2012

We (and others) were looking for a micro which turned out to be a medium. We just thought the CO was too lazy or daft to change the size in the D/T area and description. We had quite a chuckle at their expense!

3.1k · June 30, 2012

When it comes to information presented on the cache page, I believe vague is okay but outright lying/deception is wrong.

July 1, 2012

I've been thinking about placing a micro on a large, permanently-situated shipping container. Is it fair or reasonable to list the container size as a large? One suggestion that was given to me was to list an unknown cache size, but say in the description that "You are looking for a large container."

I'm putting the question out there to get some more points of view...what do you think?

July 1, 2012

I would not lie about cache size. Just use unknown.

7.9k · July 1, 2012

Ask your Mom when it is OK to lie...she'll tell you if it's OK.

5k · July 1, 2012

When it comes to information presented on the cache page, I believe vague is okay but outright lying/deception is wrong.

What about a totally honest cache description that uses the cachers' own preconceived ideas to deceive themselves?

It's my third favorited cache, yet it also has my highest DNF to find ratio.

July 1, 2012

let's not forget that there is a micro ammo can now.

If I placed it I would make it a unknown container size and say you are looking for an ammo can in the description and I would not be lying about it...

2.6k · July 1, 2012

I have come across a few caches where the size was wrong, but I tend to attribute it to carelessness on the part of the CO. One last week was listed as a Regular size, but the CO had edited the description to state that "Container used to be an ammo can but it's not anymore". Since it was still listed as Regular, I assumed it was another container of similar size, just not an ammo can. Nope, it was a magnetic keyholder in a guardrail. In this case the CO should have changed the size of the listing and I mentioned this in my log as politely as I could.

I found another Micro a few weeks ago that was listed as Small and I'm pretty sure that was the original listing. Again, I mentioned it in my log that seekers appreciate an accurate size listing so we know what we're looking for. In this case, however, I was familiar with the hider...she frequently has bad coordinates and does not maintain her caches very well, even after receiving NM logs, although she is still an active cacher and is still putting out new hides. She has one cache listed as a Letterbox hybrid that clearly is just a Small traditional. She has a cache listed as a multi where the first stage contains the logsheet and no other coordinates, so it's clearly the only stage, therefore it is a Traditional. I think this CO is not mislabeling caches to mislead cachers, but I'm starting to suspect that she is trying to have hides of every type and size and is fudging her descriptions a bit :mad:

July 2, 2012

If I found a cache and the information was intentionally misleading to the degree you describe,I would likely become angry and the cache would come up missing in action.

I know, not a proper thing to do but most people don't like to be lied to.

Don't do it.

2.4k · July 2, 2012

let's not forget that there is a micro ammo can now.

If I placed it I would make it a unknown container size and say you are looking for an ammo can in the description and I would not be lying about it...

<_<

Yeah, and the first one of those I found really P***ed me off too!!!

I felt I had been lied to.

I was not surprised when it went missing shortly after.

To me the game is to have fun. I try to place caches that will make people smile.

What kind of look on their face do you want people to walk away from your cache with?

18.9k · July 2, 2012

I've always thought that that the basic cache facts should be just that - facts.

5.6k · July 2, 2012

let's not forget that there is a micro ammo can now.

If I placed it I would make it a unknown container size and say you are looking for an ammo can in the description and I would not be lying about it...

Yeah, and the first one of those I found really P***ed me off too!!!

I felt I had been lied to.

I was not surprised when it went missing shortly after.

To me the game is to have fun. I try to place caches that will make people smile.

What kind of look on their face do you want people to walk away from your cache with?

I had the opposite reaction - I laughed. As mentioned above, our preconceived notions sometimes slow us down. Now a not-chosen/unknown ammo can tells me what I'm probably looking for.

Just like the "film can" cache years ago in 16mm reel film can...

But to actually lie about the size, that's not so cool. I carried a larger TB to Reno once and all the "large" caches in the area, weren't (except the one that required a 4x4 to get to, which I didn't have), so I ended up bringing the TB back home.

1.1k · July 2, 2012

No.

14k · July 2, 2012

let's not forget that there is a micro ammo can now.

If I placed it I would make it a unknown container size and say you are looking for an ammo can in the description and I would not be lying about it...

Yeah, and the first one of those I found really P***ed me off too!!!

I felt I had been lied to.

I was not surprised when it went missing shortly after.

To me the game is to have fun. I try to place caches that will make people smile.

What kind of look on their face do you want people to walk away from your cache with?

I had the opposite reaction - I laughed. As mentioned above, our preconceived notions sometimes slow us down. Now a not-chosen/unknown ammo can tells me what I'm probably looking for.

I DNFd a cache that had "it's an ammo can" in the description and some of the previous logs led me to believe that it was likely an micro ammo can. It would have least given me a smile if I had found it, but it think that it's unrealistic to expect that everyone would smile or laugh after finding a cache like this. It might not cause everyone to smile but I suspect that most that find it would probably remember that cache, and to me, that's about the most I could ask for any cache that I place.

3.8k · July 2, 2012

I will always, ALWAYS, out a liar's cache.

July 3, 2012

The listing should be as accurate as possible IMO. Intentionally using soft coords or a misleading size choice to up the difficulty wouldn't be appreciated from me. Just my 2 cents.

July 3, 2012

"Is it ok to lie"

No.

July 4, 2012

Many cachers like to exclude micros (and nanos, if GS damned well had a size option for them!), etc, from their PQs.

I'd be annoyed to arrive at such a site, realise the CO was being "clever" and that it was really a nano or micro. Sometimes I don't mind taking the time to hunt for peanuts in poo, but I always like the choice to be mine.

Thanks for asking, though.

1.1k · July 5, 2012

I agree that completely lying is not cool. The micro ammo can, however, has become a common hide which should be listed as a micro or not listed. What is worse than lying in this game is any cacher sabotaging a cache that they do not like. I'm rather surprised at some here who seem to be condoning or at least accepting the practice.

Is it ok to lie about cache size?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation