Container size question

[+Earl B. Fisk]

So, I am hiding a regular sized element with a micro sized container attached to it. The log goes in the micro sized container, and nothing can be put into the regular sized object. So, in my mind I should list this cache as a micro since only very small items would fit into it, but I feel a bit conflicted since cachers will assume that the object they are looking for is a micro when it is actually regular sized.

 

I'm in the Valley of Indecision. Please help.

[+eusty]

I've a similar cache, it's listed it as a 'not chosen' size but I put a note in the listing saying it is housed in a regular sized container.

[+StarBrand]

There are 2 rather distinct camps on this issue. Many debates over the years.

 

Size of the container for swag/traveler/logging considerations.

 

vs.

 

Size of the object you need to be looking for.

 

I happen to fall into the first category - I want the cache size on the interior useable space of the container. I have sometimes asked: " If you stick a bison tube in a small hole in a fallen tree is it a micro or a large??" - I say micro.

[Blue Square Thing]

I've a similar cache, it's listed it as a 'not chosen' size but I put a note in the listing saying it is housed in a regular sized container.

 

I found one today which did the same thing more or less. I think that was listed as a micro but it was very clear from the cache page that it was in a regular thing. Either that or not chosen is just fine for me.

[+Harry Dolphin]

The cache itself is a micro. List it as a micro.

[+niraD]

To me, it seems that the "Size of the object you need to be looking for" is the micro-sized container, not the regular-sized object it's attached to. Finding the log (or boulder, or whatever) doesn't help me, unless I notice the Bison tube (or film canister, or whatever) that is attached to it.

 

And of course, the "Size of the container for swag/traveler/logging considerations" is also the micro-sized container.

[+L0ne.R]

Either micro or not chosen. Not chosen makes the best sense to me with more information about the size in the description.

 

People who carry travelbugs hoping to drop them off at regular size containers will be bothered if you list it as a regular size. People who filter out micros because they like the swag aspect of geocaching will be disappointed if you list it as a regular.

[AbbeyGreen]

I would just not specify the size of this one.

[+Earl B. Fisk]

Thanks folks. Cleary the answer is none of the above. I'm going with not listed. Seems to make the most sense in this case.

[+StarBrand]

Thanks folks. Cleary the answer is none of the above. I'm going with not listed. Seems to make the most sense in this case.

no it doesn't

[+fuzziebear3]

I have one like that. I use size OTHER on the cache page, and explain that it is a regular sized container but that you must find and sign the micro sized log and there is very limited room for travel bugs.

[+dprovan]

So the bottom line is that it's up to you. I'm used to any of those possibilities. "Not Listed" and "Other" are two possibilities that flag something unusual such as what you're talking about, if you want to warn people. I'd go with "Other" since "Not Listed" too often means the CO just forgot to set the size.

 

But just for the record, logically to me, the size reflects the size of the container. Since you clearly say the bigger part can't contain anything, that makes it camo, and I consider the size of the camo to be irrelevant for sizing the cache. But, as I say, that doesn't make any other approach wrong, just different.