Jump to content

Cemetery cache attribute


unclerojelio
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

Wisconsin uses WSQ as the first part of the name and I know Indiana uses ISQ so both states make it easy to search by name. If the rest of the states wanted to use the same method I imagine the first part of the name would have to be expanded to four letters using the states post office abbreviation.

Link to comment

Yep there are a TON of cemetary caches here also, I can see an attribute designating something like a 'cemetary' not going overboard vs. a parking lot, etc. Not sure what to think of cemetary caches anyway, could be useful for some to just PQ a 'do not include' attribute for cemetary (that is if people actually attribute them).

Link to comment

Yes, this is a great idea, but like others have said, it would be a matter of implementation, just like anything else. Although, if you were a fan of the attribute, you could always kindly email those in your area that had cemetery caches and ask them to add it.

 

while we are on the subject of attributes, another one that would be great would be "power trail"

Link to comment

I love cemetery caches and find them very interesting and educational about an area. I would love an attribute for them. When I travel I like to do the cemeteries in the area. Now I have to search for them The maps don't always show where the cemeteries are. I know a lot of people don't use the attributes when they list a cache but if half would use them it would help greatly

 

It does help when the caches in the area are named with things like SQ or something that indicates that it is a cemetery.

Link to comment

I also love cemetery caches. The majority of caches I own are in cemeteries. And when I'm planning for a day of geocaching, I make it a point to put cemetery caches on my to-do list when possible. A Cemetery Cache attribute would make this task a lot easier.

 

On the other hand, there are geocachers who loathe cemetery caches and would like to have a way to filter OUT such caches. I would imagine that a Cemetery Cache attribute would come in handy for them, too.

 

Sounds like a win-win situation to me.

 

--Larry

Link to comment

The various kinds of caches that people may want to search for is nearly unlimited. Neither cache types nor attributes are meant to be used for this. Yet there are many requests for new cache types or new attributes by people who want to find a certain genre of cache. The reason may be that these are the items that be searched for in the current system. Only premium members can search for attributes as part of the Pocket Query system.

 

From time to time, Groundspeak has added attributes in response to these request. IMO, this has diluted the original purpose of the attributes. Attributes date back to a third party solution that generated a graphic that could be put on the cache page. Back in the day of paper caching, the graphic provided important information at a glance. It cleary was not meant to used for search. When Grounspeak brought this idea over to be part of the site, they became enamoured with the idea that once attributes became part of the database they would be searchable. But it took them a long time before they put search in and then even longer to get it working. Eventually searches via the pocket query were fixed, but IMO this was at the cost of implementing a better solution.

 

One partial solution for finding genres of caches is provide by the public bookmark feature. A premium member can create a bookmark list of caches and mark this as public so that a link to the list appears on the cache pages. Once you find one cemetery cache, you could click the bookmark list link to get a list of all the cemetery caches in the area. There are two main problems with this approach. One is that a single person must maintain this list of caches. Two is that you have have to find one cache that is one the list to gain access to the list. I've proposed before that bookmarks be enhanced to allow groups to maintain a list and to have a way to search for lists by keywords.

 

In addition to bookmark list, another approach would be to allow users to tag caches. Some people prefer having a list of tags that you select from. Of course this requires Grounspeak to add tags when they get requested. Still adding a tag would be easier than adding an attribute. I personally would like to see the tag be free form. Sure, that would mean that some cemetery caches would be tagged as cemetary caches or other mispelling or with local variations like spirit quest caches. But since anyone could tag a cache page eventually a cache would get all the variations making it easier to find.

Link to comment

I don't think we need any more attributes.

 

The 'short description' works fine for me:

 

'This cache is in Hooterville Cemetery'

 

Sometimes the cache is actually named 'Hooterville Cemetery', which should be a pretty good hint that it's in a cemetery. :blink:

My four cemetery caches are named Dragon's Hoard, Uncle Fred's Cache, Eleazer's Cache, and Quiet Contemplation. No hint of the word "cemetery" in the names. Though, for those who read the descriptions (and at least half of my caching friends pride themselves on not reading the description unless they absolutely have to), it's obvious they're cemetery caches.

 

Besides, now that the geocaching Web site has a totally worthless method for searching for caches by name, unless the cache name actually BEGINS with the word cemetery, including the word "cemetery" somewhere in the name won't help much anyway. Scanning a list of cache names by eyeball looking for the word "cemetery" is not the most efficient way to do it.

 

At present, there appear to be a total of 284 caches whose names begin with the word "cemetery". I've personally found more than 500 caches in cemeteries just in Ohio. There must be thousands worldwide.

 

Given the current make-up of the geocaching Web site, which doesn't (yet) accommodate anything like the "tags" method proposed by Toz, a Cemetery Cache attribute would help immensely in finding (or avoiding) cemetery caches.

 

--Larry

Link to comment

I agree with Semper. If they have a uv cache (not that popular) why not have a cemetery cache. (Very popular)

The attributes were not meant to identify genres of caches. They were meant to provide information at a glance that may be important: hazards, special conditions (like whether a fee is required or if bikes or dogs are nto allowed), or that special equipment is needed. UV light is letting people know they need special equipment to find the cache. Without a doubt, special equipment caches are less popular than ones that don't require special equipment. But these attributes exist to help prevent people who don't read the cache cache page from showing up and being surprised to find they didn't brings something they needed.

 

Mostly I use the hazards on my caches (Dangerous plants, dangerous animals, etc.) because I want to let people know to be cautious. Perhaps you need a cemetery attribute to warn people that zombies might come out of the graves and scare them? :unsure:

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

The attributes were not meant to identify genres of caches. They were meant to provide information at a glance that may be important: hazards, special conditions (like whether a fee is required or if bikes or dogs are nto allowed), or that special equipment is needed. UV light is letting people know they need special equipment to find the cache. Without a doubt, special equipment caches are less popular than ones that don't require special equipment. But these attributes exist to help prevent people who don't read the cache cache page from showing up and being surprised to find they didn't brings something they needed.

 

Mostly I use the hazards on my caches (Dangerous plants, dangerous animals, etc.) because I want to let people know to be cautious. Perhaps you need a cemetery attribute to warn people that zombies might come out of the graves and scare them? :unsure:

 

But they DO identify genres. We have attributes for night caches, tourism, and field puzzle caches as well as others. Some of the special needs icons also indicate genres such as tree-climbing and SCUBA attributes. Where do we draw the line? Do we need 3 sets of icons for the non-reading cachers? Site attributes, special consideration attributes, and genre indicators? (Please no.)

 

The description arguement, though valid, can be carried to special equipment caches as well. Unless there was a change I missed (highly possible), caches needing special equipment are supposed to be rated a terrain 5 with appropriate comments in the description. So why should they need an attribute at all? The same can be said for hazardous conditions. Why any attribnutes at all? Put it in the description.

 

Why? Becasue they are there to help people who don't read the descriptions? OK. So tell me how a cemetery attribute would not help people who are looking for or trying to avoid cemeteries (or the same for power trails or .....). How far down THIS particular road should we go? There are a bajillion things we could represent with icons that would be useful for folks that don't read descriptions. If this is what the attributes are fo, then we need to expand the attribute library and enable putting more of them on cache listings.

 

Personally, I think the attributes have gotten WAY out of hand already and I am not a big fan of them to begin with. They are far too subjective and unreliable. Most old caches don't have any and many new hiders don't use them. That makes them nearly worthless to use as PQ criteria or as reliable cache info. I don't even bother with looking at them when I'm on the hunt although I do use them on my cache listings as an aid ot others.

 

Ultimately, I think the attributes encourage hiders to write insufficient descriptions as well as seekers to not read descriptions and be complacent when caching. I've actually heard people here in Texas say they were shocked to come across PI and cactus because there were no attributes for them on a cache page. Hello! This is Texas! We have all kinds of plants, critters, and terrain to watch out for all the time; not just when an attribute on a cache page tells you to.

 

</soapbox>

Link to comment

I like the tag idea. being able to tag a cache and then search for tags sounds promising.

 

I like the idea of tags was well. Tags from a controlled vocabulary (essentially the label names for the attributes), and even free text tags would be nice. Of course, tags wouldn't be very useful unless we could search for caches (or filter search results) using the tags.

 

 

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 2
×
×
  • Create New...