Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 52
avroair

What Irks you most?

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

However, in areas with lots of caches to find, I think beginners should be given the opportunity to get more experience finding caches, before they can place a cache.

But how do you measure that experience? The raw find count is the wrong measure.

 

Besides, there are things you learn only by owning and maintaining a cache. No number of finds will teach you those things.

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/20/2020 at 10:20 AM, GeoElmo6000 said:

Similar to a previous post and hopefully not already covered.

 

When someone logs your cache and writes "This gets a favorite point!" but your cache doesn't get a favorite point.  Let it go?  Send a reminder?

I'm that person.  Sometimes I thought I clicked "favorite this" for the cache but didn't, and may or may not notice the oversight later.  Sometimes I want to, then find out I'm out (I tend to award ALL of my FPs), and then when I do have an available FP again I have to remember to go back to find the log where I said I'd favorite it.  But I can't always remember which one it is, especially back when I was streaking and getting at least one every day, or when I was on a trip, and searching old logs isn't easy.  I do (or did) have GSAK but it doesn't always work on my Mac, so my GSAK list is VERY old. 

 

Instead of the CO sending a reminder (which could look needy), I'd like to see the *site* implement reminders.  Have {FP} or [FP] (case-insensitive) be a tag you can put in your logs.  Once a day, week, month, whatever (I'm thinking month, to give folks time to earn enough FPs to cover the ones they'd like to give), GC - or Project-GC, whoever wants to do this - runs a script that compares this tag with whether you really did leave a FP for that cache or not.  If you did, fine; you get an EOMonth summary of any/all caches you've favorited.  If not, you get a list of the ones that you tagged but didn't favorite with a suggestion to either add the FP (if you have one available) or to remove the tag. 

Monthly note to cachers could look something like this (with the GC# linked to your log on each cache page):
~~~ frumiousb's favorite caches for August 2020 ~~~

 

You logged these caches as favorites and awarded each an FP:

GCABCDEF1 - D/T - name - placer - location
your log: [...]
GCABCDEF3 - D/T - name - placer - location
your log: [...]
GCABCDEF7 - D/T - name - placer - location
your log: [...]

 

You logged these caches as favorites but did not award them an FP (yet?).
Click on the GC# to go to your log if you want to award an FP now or edit your log to remove the tag.

GCABCDEF2 - D/T - name - placer - location
your log: [...]
GCABCDEF5 - D/T - name - placer - location
your log: [...]

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

--Pickypicky

Edited by frumiousb
more to add
  • Surprised 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, frumiousb said:

Instead of the CO sending a reminder (which could look needy), I'd like to see the *site* implement reminders.  Have {FP} or [FP] (case-insensitive) be a tag you can put in your logs.  Once a day, week, month, whatever (I'm thinking month, to give folks time to earn enough FPs to cover the ones they'd like to give), GC - or Project-GC, whoever wants to do this - runs a script that compares this tag with whether you really did leave a FP for that cache or not.  If you did, fine; you get an EOMonth summary of any/all caches you've favorited.  If not, you get a list of the ones that you tagged but didn't favorite with a suggestion to either add the FP (if you have one available) or to remove the tag. 

 

I just have a private list called FP-Pending, which I add caches to that I want to give an FP to but don't have any spare, then when I have another one available I give it to the cache that's been on the list the longest and remove it from the list. It seems to work pretty well in practice.

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 3

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I don't need to do the research, as I have read them, both for and against, but I am still entitled to reiterate my point of view in passing. If you hadn't unnecessarily commented in the way you did, that would have been it. Just a casual, passing comment; nothing more; slotted between other comments. You made it more.

To be fair, you did use the word "need", which implies it is imperative, not just nice to have.

 

Personally I feel that we all ought to chill out a bit on the whole "new cachers must have x amount of experience before hiding a cache".  I think most do anyway, and i don't think it's much of a precursor to success.  I hid my first after only a handful of finds, it had an issue or two, but then it lasted for a while and it was a fun cache.  I made a few more mistakes over time, but ultimately it worked out - I've hidden some good and bad caches, and three "geocache of the week" awards, so as an official Mr Average my lack of experience initially didn't turn out totally bad.  And, well, how many caches did Dave Ulmer find before he hid his first? :)

  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, funkymunkyzone said:

Personally I feel that we all ought to chill out a bit on the whole "new cachers must have x amount of experience before hiding a cache".  I think most do anyway, and i don't think it's much of a precursor to success.  I hid my first after only a handful of finds, it had an issue or two, but then it lasted for a while and it was a fun cache.  I made a few more mistakes over time, but ultimately it worked out - I've hidden some good and bad caches, and three "geocache of the week" awards, so as an official Mr Average my lack of experience initially didn't turn out totally bad.  And, well, how many caches did Dave Ulmer find before he hid his first?

 

Yes, I'd found just 20 before hiding my first one (GC4CAXV) in a bushland reserve near home, but those 20 covered a fair range of hiding locations and container types. Here's my D/T grid from those finds:

 

image.png.763df0e71e61b00a8c499af771a8942b.png

 

It didn't get any FPs in its almost two years of life but was well received by the community, with accurate coordinates and a container/hiding place that kept the logbook and contents dry. I archived (and retrieved) it when a tree fell right on top of its hiding place. In most respects it's no different to my most recent traditional (GC8TAFN), in that it's a Sistema containing a notepad logbook and a pencil placed in a hollow at the base of a tree, except it's a bit more of a hike to GZ and is probably a more interesting experience for the finders. Cache location, story-telling and themes are the main things I've learnt since then, but that learning experience would have been essentially the same if I'd waited another year or two before hiding my first one.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, niraD said:

But how do you measure that experience? The raw find count is the wrong measure.

 

Besides, there are things you learn only by owning and maintaining a cache. No number of finds will teach you those things.

That's where I disagree, and I was able to know how inexperienced I was when I started and knew I needed to find plenty of caches before placing one, and even then I still felt presumptuous to place a cache, when I did finally place my first cache. I thought the nano bit of chewing gum cache was unique, proving I really did need more experience :D.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

That's where I disagree, and I was able to know how inexperienced I was when I started and knew I needed to find plenty of caches before placing one, and even then I still felt presumptuous to place a cache, when I did finally place my first cache. I thought the nano bit of chewing gum cache was unique, proving I really did need more experience :D.

 

Finding a hundred pill bottles thrown under bushes doesn't teach you much more than finding just a few and you only have to find one rusting Eclipse tin to know that they make terrible containers. All it takes is a little exposure to what makes a good cache (and probably what makes a bad one) to be able to come up with something half-decent yourself. The rest is learning from experience of your own hides. I still consider Quest for the Middle Sea Diamond to be my flagship cache, the one against which I judge all my other hides, but I would never have come up with that as a first hide. It took a mix of hiding and finding experience, as well as meeting with other cachers in the region, to bring all the elements together for that one.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:
8 hours ago, niraD said:

But how do you measure that experience? The raw find count is the wrong measure.

 

Besides, there are things you learn only by owning and maintaining a cache. No number of finds will teach you those things.

That's where I disagree,

I'm confused. What do you disagree with?

 

The idea that the raw find count is the wrong measure of experience? Or the idea that there are things you don't learn from finding caches, that can be learned only by owning and maintaining a cache? Or... something else?

 

1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

and I was able to know how inexperienced I was when I started and knew I needed to find plenty of caches before placing one, and even then I still felt presumptuous to place a cache, when I did finally place my first cache. I thought the nano bit of chewing gum cache was unique, proving I really did need more experience :D.

Well, yes, thinking that something readily available online is unique does indicate a certain lack of experience. But I don't see how familiarity with the full range of commercially available camouflaged containers is the kind of experience that a CO needs to be a good CO. Just as I don't see how finding hundreds of fungible film canisters is the kind of experience that a CO needs to be a good CO.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

I thought the nano bit of chewing gum cache was unique, proving I really did need more experience :D.

 

Just because it didn't turn out to be as unique as you had thought doesn't make it a bad cache or you a poor CO for placing it.  Besides, they're not that common so still fun to find something "different".

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, funkymunkyzone said:

 

Just because it didn't turn out to be as unique as you had thought doesn't make it a bad cache or you a poor CO for placing it.  Besides, they're not that common so still fun to find something "different".

It was a nano. Except for a few exceptions, most nanos by their nature are, ...ordinary at best. I have never placed another nano. I archived that cache after two nanos went missing. I suspect they were taken by birds, not humans. I have another cache nearby, but it's a micro now. I would have put a small if there were a safe place for it.

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know why this irks me.... but for events where a TB is dropped and goes missing.... Why do owners post notes asking where their TB is and then ask why doesn't the Event Owner mark the TB as missing. I've seen these notes posted on events up to two years later.
 

I understand that people are concerned, but its not like those notes are going to reach the intended audience. Only the Event Owner and the random person that looks back at an event are going to see the notes. And a TB owner can mark their own TB as missing. I've had to do that to some of mine.  

 


 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

That's where I disagree, and I was able to know how inexperienced I was when I started and knew I needed to find plenty of caches before placing one, and even then I still felt presumptuous to place a cache, when I did finally place my first cache.

 

You (and others) seem to believe that finding X number of caches will help determine who a "good" CO will be, even if it's on a sliding scale based on cache density of an area.  Finding "plenty of caches" doesn't mean anything if you find 200 pill bottles, mint tins, film cans and nothing else.  It's just a number and one container type/size, which is why the number of finds is so inherently tough to mandate as to whether or not a cacher is ready to become a CO.  All it really tells us is that the cacher is able to find X number of caches and tells us nothing about what they're going to be like as a CO.  I would think that a variety of D/T rated caches , a variety of sized finds, and a variety of cache types would be a much better indicator for a cacher to determine whether or not they are ready to become a CO.  However, even that has its own issues as there's no good indicator as to whether or not a CO will be a good CO.  All it means is that they've managed to find lots of different types, sizes, and D/T combinations of hides.  What does anything about "number" of finds (regardless of how that is interpreted) indicate about the viability of someone becoming a CO who is willing to maintain their caches in a manner outlined in the guidelines?

 

It's the inherent traits of a cacher to be mindful of maintenance requirements as well as what they think caching should be like for their hides that will determine the viability of a CO who maintains their caches.  Someone who is a numbers cacher (meaning they like to find LOTS of caches) will most likely put out caches that are easy park and grabs.  Whether or not they will be maintained is irrelevant to the type of hide that is placed but is instead something the CO already has inside of themselves, a sense of responsibility to take care of what they have placed.  Finding 100 caches, 10 of each size, 5 of each kind, 20 of the 81 D/T grid, or any other arbitrary number that is put out there tells us absolutely nothing about what they're going to be like as a CO.  Sure, it exposes them to 100 caches, 7 different sizes, 9 different cache types, and a variety of D/T combinations, which would hopefully allow them a varied experience that could help determine their likes and dislikes, but it does nothing to provide them with the needed dedication to be the type of CO that takes care of their caches.  

 

This is like telling an aspiring musician to watch 50 Broadway shows, go out and listen to 20 different musical styles, and watch 15 other musicians at work before you attempt to become a musician.  All of that exposure is probably good for them but it doesn't tell us anything about what type of musician they're actually going to become.  The only true way for them (and us) to learn what type of musician they can become is with hands on experience.  What level of dedication anyone applies to their craft can't really be determined by those pre-requisites we place in front of them.  That's something that's inherent in each and every person. We can improve our craft (whatever that craft might be - lawyer to CO) by watching others and learning from them but the desire to use and implement what we learn and see has to come from within.  If I want to be a good musician, then watching what others do and listening to a variety of music won't actually make me become better.  Practice of my chosen instrument or practical application within my field of music study is what would make me a good musician and that dedication can only truly come from within.

 

13 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I thought the nano bit of chewing gum cache was unique, proving I really did need more experience :D.

 

It didn't show that you needed more experience.  It showed that you learned you weren't content with placing this type of cache because it ran against some ingrained feeling of dissatisfaction that arose within you.  You performed a hands on activity that you thought was going to be satisfactory to your sense of what a good cache might be and then found out that you weren't content with it.  Some of that can be contributed to finding a few like that (they're not really that common) but most of it is probably because you felt it wasn't "worthy" of the type of cache you wanted to put out.  There are many cachers out there that would enjoy a hide like this, especially if it were regularly maintained (log not full).  It's not a "bad" cache, in and of itself.  It's just not a cache that you want to be associated with because you believe it to be antithetical to your sense of what types of hides you want to own and maintain.  That's most likely due more to internal processes (your belief in what constitutes a "good" cache) than external processes (finding more caches).

 

While my personal preference is to hope that potential COs experience a variety of hides, sizes, types, and D/T combos, I don't believe that those experiences should be mandated.  I've found enough poorly maintained caches from COs with lots more finds than I have and I've found enough well-maintained caches from COs with far less finds than I have to realize that the number of finds isn't a good indicator of who will or won't be a good CO when it comes to maintaining their caches.  I've found enough poor "quality" caches (per my personal preferences) from COs with lots more finds than I have and I've found enough good "quality" caches from COs with far less finds than I have to realize that the number of finds isn't a good indicator of who will or will not hide "quality" caches that I prefer to find. 

 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
52 minutes ago, coachstahly said:

 

<...>

 

...good indicator of who will or will not hide "quality" caches that I prefer to find. 

 

 

Aaaaaand, of course, a new account with no finds doesn't mean that it's a new cacher with no finds or previous hides.

 

" You can't divorce me; you'd have start again from scratch with your new caching account!"

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I saw a reply to this topic where someone mentioned, hiking out into the woods just for a micro. Last weekend, I went hiking into the woods for a cache where the CO said, you could reach it either from the park or the church. The woods (dense) are between them. So, since I was in the park I went that route. I thought I was ready. I had on long pants so as to not get mosquito bites. After about 20 mins of pulling out of thorns and nearly twisting my ankle, I came to a creek. The creek wasn't the problem. The problem was, it was 20ft straight down (like a cliff) and 20ft up the other side. I looked at my GPS and it said the cache was on the other side. I was not expecting this with a 3 difficulty in terrain. I walked up and down the creek looking for a good place to cross without needing climbing gear to get out. After searching for a spell, I gave up and concluded I needed to approach from the church. It was getting late so I called it a day. The next morning, I was covered in spider bites all over my legs. they were so bad, I couldn't sleep they were so itchy. So, not only was I mad that the CO didn't accurately rate the terrain or the gear you might need but I came away with a dozen spider bites. It's just part of the "fun" I guess. Although finding Letterbox caches with no stamp and no pads are highly frustrating for me, especially when no one mentions they're missing and it's obvious the CO has not been keeping up with their caches.

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, AsphaltCowGurl said:

Last weekend, I went hiking into the woods for a cache where the CO said, you could reach it either from the park or the church. The woods (dense) are between them. So, since I was in the park I went that route. I thought I was ready. I had on long pants so as to not get mosquito bites. After about 20 mins of pulling out of thorns and nearly twisting my ankle, I came to a creek. The creek wasn't the problem. The problem was, it was 20ft straight down (like a cliff) and 20ft up the other side. I looked at my GPS and it said the cache was on the other side. I was not expecting this with a 3 difficulty in terrain. I walked up and down the creek looking for a good place to cross without needing climbing gear to get out. After searching for a spell, I gave up and concluded I needed to approach from the church. It was getting late so I called it a day. The next morning, I was covered in spider bites all over my legs. they were so bad, I couldn't sleep they were so itchy. So, not only was I mad that the CO didn't accurately rate the terrain or the gear you might need but I came away with a dozen spider bites. It's just part of the "fun" I guess.

 

At the other extreme, one of my multis has its final in a narrow strip of public bushland between a creek and a private caravan park. I didn't want people either finding themselves on the wrong side of the water and tangled in thorns or incurring the wrath of the caravan park operators, so I provided a fairly detailed guide of how to get to GZ once the field puzzle had been solved. That resulted in this log recently:

 

Quote

Found itFound it

Puzzle was waste of time found it just by the clues

 

 

Many a time I've bush-bashed my way to GZ only to find there's an easy path on the way out. Sometimes finding a good way to the cache is part of the challenge the CO has set and sometimes reading past logs is a good idea. There can be a fine line between too much hand-holding and leaving too much to the imagination of the searcher, and sometimes no matter what the CO does someone will get upset.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, AsphaltCowGurl said:

I saw a reply to this topic where someone mentioned, hiking out into the woods just for a micro. Last weekend, I went hiking into the woods for a cache where the CO said, you could reach it either from the park or the church. The woods (dense) are between them. So, since I was in the park I went that route. I thought I was ready. I had on long pants so as to not get mosquito bites. After about 20 mins of pulling out of thorns and nearly twisting my ankle, I came to a creek. The creek wasn't the problem. The problem was, it was 20ft straight down (like a cliff) and 20ft up the other side. I looked at my GPS and it said the cache was on the other side. I was not expecting this with a 3 difficulty in terrain. I walked up and down the creek looking for a good place to cross without needing climbing gear to get out. After searching for a spell, I gave up and concluded I needed to approach from the church. It was getting late so I called it a day. The next morning, I was covered in spider bites all over my legs. they were so bad, I couldn't sleep they were so itchy. So, not only was I mad that the CO didn't accurately rate the terrain or the gear you might need but I came away with a dozen spider bites. It's just part of the "fun" I guess. Although finding Letterbox caches with no stamp and no pads are highly frustrating for me, especially when no one mentions they're missing and it's obvious the CO has not been keeping up with their caches.

Ha! I'd love to read your DNF log on this one!

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, AsphaltCowGurl said:

....The next morning, I was covered in spider bites all over my legs. they were so bad, I couldn't sleep they were so itchy. ...

And by spiders do you mean chiggers?   I was about to say they are insects but I did a quick search and they are actually arachnids, like spiders are.  Learn something new every day.  But I've known of their "work" for some time.  They attack areas with restrictive clothing.  Insect repellent works.  The little buggers will jump off instead of staying around to bite.  Otherwise, getting out of your clothes and taking a shower soon after exposure will prevent the problem. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Many a time I've bush-bashed my way to GZ only to find there's an easy path on the way out.

Yes, such as walk/slide down a steep longish gravel hill. Follow a path; it runs out, down on hands and knees crawling through vegetation and under thick bushes, come out the other side and realise you are under the cache and there is a steep rocky slope (almost a cliff) to clamber up. Reach the top, and find none of this was necessary. At least I discovered a couple of cave entrances on my way there.

Share this post


Link to post

Found a cache today hidden on a slide in a playground.  (Well, with the remnants of Hurricane Laura coming through, I needed something easy.)  An MKH listed as 'small'.  I thought caches in playgrounds were prohibited?

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, Harry Dolphin said:

Found a cache today hidden on a slide in a playground.  (Well, with the remnants of Hurricane Laura coming through, I needed something easy.)  An MKH listed as 'small'.  I thought caches in playgrounds were prohibited?

 

The Guidelines currently say this on cache placement restrictions:

 

Quote

Stay away from restricted areas

Do not place geocaches in restricted, prohibited, or otherwise inappropriate locations. Some areas have additional regulations and laws that further restrict geocache placement. Geocaching HQ staff or a community volunteer may temporarily disable or permanently archive the cache page if any of the following is reported. (This list is not comprehensive.)

  • A landowner or land manager reports the geocache.
  • The geocache is in an area that is sensitive to additional foot or vehicular traffic. Examples may include archaeological sites, historical sites, and cemeteries.
  • The geocache is on railroad property or right of way. See the Regional Geocaching Policies Wiki for details in your region.
  • The geocache is problematic due to its proximity to a public structure. Examples include highway bridges, major roadways, dams, government buildings, schools, military installations, hospitals, airports and other areas defined in the Regional Geocaching Policies Wiki.
  • Locations that strongly encourage or require access through restricted locations.

 

Nothing specifically about playgrounds in there, however the Help Centre says this:

 

Quote

Choose an appropriate location

Make sure your location is appropriate. Avoid areas where your cache may be mistaken for a bomb, like a bridge or airport. Avoid areas near schools or playgrounds, where cache hunting behavior may worry parents or school staff.


That reads as more advisory than prohibitive, but the regional wikis might be more explicit.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, Harry Dolphin said:

Found a cache today hidden on a slide in a playground.

Third time yesterday I tried to find a cache I know is hidden on a slippery dip; third time I had to drive away without searching because the area was full of children. Not a place for adults to go near without children in toe. "Mummy, what's she doing there?" Thanks kid, draw more attention to me. Make me feel more uncomfortable being here than I do. If I feel bad, how must males feel?

It's mainly starry-eyed new cachers and starry-eyed new parents who place their caches in child's playgrounds. "Bring your child, have an outing" type words in the description. Yeah, most cachers have playground-aged children we can magically pull out of a box when needed.

Sorry for my cynicism, but it's how I feel when I turn up to yet another playground. Don't parents worry about paedophiles? Geocaching would be a great cover for it, to pretend to geocache. But then maybe not all parents seem to know to worry; remembering seeing this suspicious gentleman 'on' his phone in the shadows near a playground with children playing (parents were there). When I purposely looked his direction, I had the feeling he didn't want me to notice him. Another playground cache I had to bypass.

Really, caches in playgrounds are a bad idea. Obviously after that grumble, caches in playgrounds irk me:anitongue:.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

The Guidelines currently say this on cache placement restrictions:

 

 

Nothing specifically about playgrounds in there, however the Help Centre says this:

 


That reads as more advisory than prohibitive, but the regional wikis might be more explicit.

I think "otherwise inappropriate" covers it.

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Really, caches in playgrounds are a bad idea. Obviously after that grumble, caches in playgrounds irk me:anitongue:.

 

I suppose it also depends on what you consider a playground. I have an 8-stage multi (GC879J3) set around the local Recreation Precinct, which has an enclosed playpen for toddlers, swings and roundabouts for slightly older kids, a climbing wall, a flying fox, bike paths, a skateboard rink, a BMX track, soccer fields, tennis courts, a cafe, picnic tables and an adjacent surf beach.

 

RecreationPrecinct.jpg.da9974628b855c03178cf102bdbe9e96.jpg

 

The virtual waypoints are activity signposts that are scattered throughout the precinct, with the physical cache in the bushland on the left of the picture. There are kids and adults of all ages roaming the area, with or without kids/dogs/bikes, so there's no reason for anyone to feel uncomfortable walking around looking at the signs, but technically it's still a playground.

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I suppose it also depends on what you consider a playground. I have an 8-stage multi (GC879J3) set around the local Recreation Precinct, which has an enclosed playpen for toddlers, swings and roundabouts for slightly older kids, a climbing wall, a flying fox, bike paths, a skateboard rink, a BMX track, soccer fields, tennis courts, a cafe, picnic tables and an adjacent surf beach.

 

RecreationPrecinct.jpg.da9974628b855c03178cf102bdbe9e96.jpg

 

The virtual waypoints are activity signposts that are scattered throughout the precinct, with the physical cache in the bushland on the left of the picture. There are kids and adults of all ages roaming the area, with or without kids/dogs/bikes, so there's no reason for anyone to feel uncomfortable walking around looking at the signs, but technically it's still a playground.

 

Ok, I have to ask, even though this isn't geocaching related, what is a "flying fox"?  I'm guessing it's not a bat species, but I may be wrong...

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, The Jester said:

Ok, I have to ask, even though this isn't geocaching related, what is a "flying fox"?  I'm guessing it's not a bat species, but I may be wrong...

 

One of these things:

 

FlyingFox.jpg.861c7bc3335ae57d88ae594e19e5518b.jpg

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

One of these things:

 

Went on a 180 meter  long one in Oz (at O'Reilley's in Lamington National Park) once, great fun, but it wasn't one that was made for children.B)

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, The Jester said:

Ok, I have to ask, even though this isn't geocaching related, what is a "flying fox"?  I'm guessing it's not a bat species, but I may be wrong...

Goes by the name of zip line in northern climes.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, colleda said:

Goes by the name of zip line in northern climes.

Except zip lines have the rider wearing a harness, clipped into the pulley mechanism for safety. And they're higher. I've seen similar equipment in US playgrounds, where the kids hold onto a handle and their feet stay close to the ground. I wouldn't have called them zip lines.

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Obviously after that grumble, caches in playgrounds irk me:anitongue:.

They irk me too, and I do cache with young kids. So they can get in there and look under everything without suspicious eyes, they want to stay and play.....

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Third time yesterday I tried to find a cache I know is hidden on a slippery dip; third time I had to drive away without searching because the area was full of children. Not a place for adults to go near without children in toe.

"Mummy, what's she doing there?" Thanks kid, draw more attention to me.

Make me feel more uncomfortable being here than I do. If I feel bad, how must males feel?

It's mainly starry-eyed new cachers and starry-eyed new parents who place their caches in child's playgrounds. "Bring your child, have an outing" type words in the description. Yeah, most cachers have playground-aged children we can magically pull out of a box when needed.

Sorry for my cynicism, but it's how I feel when I turn up to yet another playground.

Don't parents worry about paedophiles? Geocaching would be a great cover for it, to pretend to geocache. But then maybe not all parents seem to know to worry; remembering seeing this suspicious gentleman 'on' his phone in the shadows near a playground with children playing (parents were there). When I purposely looked his direction, I had the feeling he didn't want me to notice him. Another playground cache I had to bypass.

Really, caches in playgrounds are a bad idea. Obviously after that grumble, caches in playgrounds irk me:anitongue:.

Bolded mine...

Think of a bearded guy in camo, and I'd bet you'd have a much better chance of getting away with it.  :laughing:

I agree completely.  Small community playgrounds the worst.  The other 2/3rds even stopped doing them. I thought it was just a guy issue...

Some new person thinks it's a wonderful place to hide a cache for families, not realizing that's what's gonna get torches and pitchforks out if you have none. :)

The other 2/3rds found around a dozen caches underneath the slide years ago.   I found a nano under a roundabout once.

That's asking for trouble.  Fortunately they're few and far these days.  One of the many reasons I only do 2T and up hides anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

I found a nano under a roundabout once.

Same here, although it took two visits to find a gap between child visitors.

 

I had to laugh at one log I read. He wrong something like, "I hate caches in playgrounds. I walked up to the hide with parents and children around it; ignored them,  extracted the cache, signed the log and returned the cache and left. I hate caches in playgrounds."

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post

The few caches we did at or near playgrounds were WPs of multi's where we had to collect information (color of an item, letter/number on an item) but never was there anyone around. We avoid busy places anyway so popular spots are done in winter.

Hiding a container near a playground is a bad idea anyway, kids will find it by accident and it will disappear.

 

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, barefootjeff said:
Quote

Choose an appropriate location

Make sure your location is appropriate. Avoid areas where your cache may be mistaken for a bomb, like a bridge or airport. Avoid areas near schools or playgrounds, where cache hunting behavior may worry parents or school staff.


That reads as more advisory than prohibitive, but the regional wikis might be more explicit.

 

I think it's more than advisory when it comes to schools.   Other than at colleges and universities I think their very strict about caches on/near school property.

Share this post


Link to post

This is one I visited.

 

Screenshot_1.png.ea2b37f9b8479a7b4c677975d79a2bc0.png

 

So many things wrong with this cache:

  • Playground
  • Remove 4 screws. Stand there for about 10 minutes or longer dismantling and putting it back together, prolonging your exposure to concerned parents and curious kids
  • It's an electric conduit box (a huge irk because it sends the message that geocachers think that playing with and dismantling public electric equipment is a legitimate form of fun)
  • It's a guideline infraction for screwing it to a playground sign post
  • Upvote 5
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post

Given our caching 'persona', we don't really concern ourselves about what people are thinking wherever we go, playgrounds included.  People see us and pretty much ignore us.  Stealth is vastly overrated.  The gear we wear whenever caching.  The signs go on the cachemobile along with the light bar.  Makes things ever so much simpler.  If anyone is interested in 'joining' US Survey, just PM as others have done and I'll send the artwork.

 

457835222_ShirtandHatResize.thumb.jpg.6198fb0fd91c8bb510699922ae58a283.jpg119513722_Sign9.thumb.png.003d462e34695d5d5bf8bec0d63f612d.png

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

One of these things:

 

FlyingFox.jpg.861c7bc3335ae57d88ae594e19e5518b.jpg

Thank you.  It's always interesting to learn idioms/phrases from other countries.  Sorry for the highjack, I know that irks others...

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:
  •  
  • It's an electric conduit box (a huge irk because it sends the message that geocachers think that playing with and dismantling public electric equipment is a legitimate form of fun)
  •  

I've never understood why looking/opening a box without any wires attached would encourage people to dismantle everything electrical.  Couldn't that argument be used against fake birdhouses?  We can't have people disturbing birds now can we?  I guess it's a slight irk of mine.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, The Jester said:

I've never understood why looking/opening a box without any wires attached would encourage people to dismantle everything electrical.  Couldn't that argument be used against fake birdhouses?  We can't have people disturbing birds now can we?  I guess it's a slight irk of mine.

 

Because the wires wouldn't necessarily come from the side.

Could be a junction box fed from the back.

It's just a bad practice, to which we shouldn't expect cachers to apply logic.

Edited by TeamRabbitRun
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

 

Because the wires wouldn't necessarily come from the side.

Could be a junction box fed from the back.

It's just a bad practice, to which we shouldn't expect cachers to apply logic.

Yep, that irk is up there with fake sprinklers. Take apart a real sprinkler you may get wet depending on timing, open a real junction box and.......

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, colleda said:

Yep, that irk is up there with fake sprinklers. Take apart a real sprinkler you may get wet depending on timing, open a real junction box and.......

I took apart a sprinkler once and then had to put it back together again. I had a hard time with the spring and it took some time getting it back together again, and fortunately I didn't get wet.

The next person also pulled the sprinkler apart, but wrote they didn't get it back together. The CO then wrote, "It's NOT the sprinkler." Wish I had known that. I never found the cache.

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post

This is really getting on my nerves--cachers who have years of experience, but do not maintain their caches.  Two examples--1) we have a local group that has put out many power trails over the years.  I've done quite a few, and what started out as mostly preforms, are now Altoid tins, Aleve bottles, orange prescription bottles, or DNFs.  They never maintain them.  2) A member of that group has over 20,000 finds.  I'm working on the "birthday grid", and have come across many of his that have a string of DNFs over more than one year.  I have yet to see him do maintenance, or even comment on, any of them.  I've started writing notes saying they need maintenance, and if nothing is done is a few weeks, post that they should be archived.  

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, GrateBear said:

This is really getting on my nerves--cachers who have years of experience, but do not maintain their caches.  Two examples--1) we have a local group that has put out many power trails over the years.  I've done quite a few, and what started out as mostly preforms, are now Altoid tins, Aleve bottles, orange prescription bottles, or DNFs.  They never maintain them.  2) A member of that group has over 20,000 finds.  I'm working on the "birthday grid", and have come across many of his that have a string of DNFs over more than one year.  I have yet to see him do maintenance, or even comment on, any of them.  I've started writing notes saying they need maintenance, and if nothing is done is a few weeks, post that they should be archived.

 

Instead of writing notes, file a NM log.  If nothing gets done by the CO after a designated period of time to allow the CO to post a note or actually fix it, file the NA log.  This should be done regardless of how long someone has been caching.  It shouldn't matter if they've been caching for 10 years or 10 weeks.  If a cache needs maintenance, then a NM log should be filed.  Your fellow cachers who are logging these caches are doing a disservice to these caches by NOT filing a NM log.  If they had done it, then you could have followed up with a NA log (assuming an appropriate amount of time had passed to allow the CO the opportunity to post a note or perform the needed maintenance) and drawn the reviewer's attention. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/30/2020 at 1:37 PM, L0ne.R said:

This is one I visited.

 

Screenshot_1.png.ea2b37f9b8479a7b4c677975d79a2bc0.png

 

So many things wrong with this cache:

  • Playground
  • Remove 4 screws. Stand there for about 10 minutes or longer dismantling and putting it back together, prolonging your exposure to concerned parents and curious kids
  • It's an electric conduit box (a huge irk because it sends the message that geocachers think that playing with and dismantling public electric equipment is a legitimate form of fun)
  • It's a guideline infraction for screwing it to a playground sign post

 

So the screws would be my ender right there -- I dont think you should ever need to unscrew something.   Plus the guidelines, and the muggle factor -- I would have ended up with a DNF at that one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, coachstahly said:

 

Instead of writing notes, file a NM log.  If nothing gets done by the CO after a designated period of time to allow the CO to post a note or actually fix it, file the NA log.  This should be done regardless of how long someone has been caching.  It shouldn't matter if they've been caching for 10 years or 10 weeks.  If a cache needs maintenance, then a NM log should be filed.  Your fellow cachers who are logging these caches are doing a disservice to these caches by NOT filing a NM log.  If they had done it, then you could have followed up with a NA log (assuming an appropriate amount of time had passed to allow the CO the opportunity to post a note or perform the needed maintenance) and drawn the reviewer's attention. 

Yep, I should have been clearer about the notes, as I am posting NM, as well.  I took a look at this CO's hides--the vast majority of archived caches was done by the reviewer, as the CO did not respond.    

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think I should really be *mad* about geocaching, and I appreciate that cache owners placing caches continues the fun of the game which has lasted what, 20 years? But I've just gotten back into it after a 6-year hiatus and got Premium. Now I'm asking myself *why* because many premium caches have issues with multiple DNFs spanning a year or more...and somehow it didn't trip any algorithm for a reviewer. My thought is: why place premium caches if you aren't going to maintain them, and why doesn't Groundspeak or whomever prioritize the maintenance of these caches...seems to me that premium caches should have just a tad bit more attention paid to them not only by those who place them but by the website itself.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/30/2020 at 10:37 AM, L0ne.R said:

This is one I visited.

 

Screenshot_1.png.ea2b37f9b8479a7b4c677975d79a2bc0.png

 

So many things wrong with this cache:

  • Playground
  • Remove 4 screws. Stand there for about 10 minutes or longer dismantling and putting it back together, prolonging your exposure to concerned parents and curious kids
  • It's an electric conduit box (a huge irk because it sends the message that geocachers think that playing with and dismantling public electric equipment is a legitimate form of fun)
  • It's a guideline infraction for screwing it to a playground sign post

what happens when the screws get stripped eventually lol  I've always been very wary of opening electrical boxes but I have found little magnetic ones inside sometimes. It's kind of a roll of the dice when you get to one of these and DNF and haven't checked inside the box

Share this post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, P4nD0r4 said:

I don't think I should really be *mad* about geocaching, and I appreciate that cache owners placing caches continues the fun of the game which has lasted what, 20 years? But I've just gotten back into it after a 6-year hiatus and got Premium. Now I'm asking myself *why* because many premium caches have issues with multiple DNFs spanning a year or more...and somehow it didn't trip any algorithm for a reviewer. My thought is: why place premium caches if you aren't going to maintain them, and why doesn't Groundspeak or whomever prioritize the maintenance of these caches...seems to me that premium caches should have just a tad bit more attention paid to them not only by those who place them but by the website itself.

 

If someone wants to bring a cache to the attention of a reviewer, they should log an NA. A few DNFs over the course of a year doesn't necessarily mean there's anything wrong with the cache, it can just as easily mean it's hard to find or even that a bunch of people had trouble on one that was meant to be easy (maybe there was a muggle convention at GZ). On 90% of the DNFs I've logged there's been nothing wrong with the cache, just my inept searching. Likewise, of the 65 DNFs that have been logged on my hides, only 2 have been due to a cache problem. The Cache Health Score's DNF-counting algorithm can only go so far and has to walk a fine line between missing some that need attention and falsely pinging those that don't. If a cache needs attention from the CO, log an NM and if that doesn't get a response, follow it up with an NA. That'll be far more effective than waiting for an algorithm to discover that the cache has a problem.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, P4nD0r4 said:

I don't think I should really be *mad* about geocaching, and I appreciate that cache owners placing caches continues the fun of the game which has lasted what, 20 years? But I've just gotten back into it after a 6-year hiatus and got Premium. Now I'm asking myself *why* because many premium caches have issues with multiple DNFs spanning a year or more...and somehow it didn't trip any algorithm for a reviewer. My thought is: why place premium caches if you aren't going to maintain them, and why doesn't Groundspeak or whomever prioritize the maintenance of these caches...seems to me that premium caches should have just a tad bit more attention paid to them not only by those who place them but by the website itself.

 

I'm kinda surprised that you see a difference.  I'd ask why place any cache if they aren't gonna maintain them, but I sorta agree.   :)

We've seen no difference since '04 between a standard cache and pmo other than basic members can't view them.   ;)

One of our first pmo caches found was a guard rail hide with a hide-a-key and damp log...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/2/2020 at 6:11 PM, fuzziebear3 said:

 

So the screws would be my ender right there -- I dont think you should ever need to unscrew something.   Plus the guidelines, and the muggle factor -- I would have ended up with a DNF at that one.

 

Muggles yes... they would keep me from logging this one. Anything electric, nope. We logged large electricity boxes, most were gadget caches with electronics inside to get codes or to unlock compartments. We logged a few electricity outlets where a micro was hidden where a plug should be inserted, in seems that the plug and a 35mm film canister have the same size. Only recently we found an electrical switch + outlet combination fixed to an utility pole holding a micro.

As for unscrewing, most of the time, if something needs to be unscrewed it's mentioned in the listing or hint that a screwdriver is needed. It's part of our TOTT backpack anyway.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, on4bam said:

As for unscrewing, most of the time, if something needs to be unscrewed it's mentioned in the listing or hint that a screwdriver is needed. It's part of our TOTT backpack anyway.

I don't recall any caches that I had to unscrew with a screwdriver (or equivalent). Naturally, I've found a bunch that require unscrewing, the way a jar lid unscrews.

 

I wouldn't unscrew anything with a screwdriver unless I had it in my hand and it was clearly identified as a geocache. And while I have a number of screwdriver blades in my EDC, I don't really consider it part of my geocaching TOTT.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 52

×
×
  • Create New...