Jump to content

Magnetic Sign Geocache


Followers 7

Recommended Posts

Hi there

 

I recently found a series of caches which used magnetic signs but you actually wrote on the back of the sign on a printed log on the back(not a piece of paper in the back).

 

I've contacted the CO a couple of times but he hasn't replied so was wondering if anyone had come across these before and if so where could you buy them - I'm in the UK

 

Thanks in advance

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Hi there

 

I recently found a series of caches which used magnetic signs but you actually wrote on the back of the sign on a printed log on the back(not a piece of paper in the back).

 

I've contacted the CO a couple of times but he hasn't replied so was wondering if anyone had come across these before and if so where could you buy them - I'm in the UK

 

Thanks in advance

 

By Groundspeak's definition, this is not a valid geocache. A geocache is a container that contains a separate, removable log.

Link to comment

I googled it and found quite a few examples with Companies in the UK.

Unfortunately, none had any without a real log in the back.

Unfortunately, also found a utube vid (also in the UK) of a magnetic sign that the CO recessed into a public path gate, so then I lost interest.

 

Seems it'd be easy enough to make your own with magnetic sheets found at most craft stores.

Link to comment

As mentioned previously they are a guideline violation unless there is a "container" for the log. Some people get around this by taping a small Ziploc to the back and putting the logbook in there.

 

Although most probably get away with it simply by neglecting to mention to mention how the cache was constructed and unless someone else mentions it, the reviewer might never become aware that it violates the guideline. Note, that I am no way condoning that cache owners do this, but that explains all the flat magnet caches out that that *do* violate the guidelines.

 

 

Link to comment

I came across a magnetic sign at a park, it was on a utility box in plain sight, but blended in perfectly.

 

You can buy these on eBay, or make them at home. Just take a magnet that you want to use and tape the log sheet on the back. Maybe check out some of those lesser known cache container online stores. Geocaching.com doesn't sell them, but I'm sure you can find another site that does.

Link to comment

I encountered one that was a magnetic sign, maybe 2" by 3" and what "gave it away" was a slight bulge. The sign was a

random set of numbers that I didn't correlate with anything in particular. The bulge was a zip baggie glued to the magnet.

The magnet sealed up nicely, I believe, with the substrate. The baggie was the container... Bending the rules I am sure but

creative and it kept true to the concept. A container with a removable log that was hidden.

Link to comment

At https://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx, Geocache Listing Guideline II., 1., 3.:Geocache Contents says:

 

"Geocache containers include a logsheet or logbook.

For all physical caches, there must be a logbook, scroll or other type of log for geocachers to record their visit."

 

That does not say that the logbook, scroll or other type of log must not be physically attached to the "container".

I don't see that a flat magnet with a log on the back side violates the guidelines. Please quote me where in the guidelines it does require a separate container (with URL please).

 

Best regards.

Edited by Orcadian
Link to comment
At https://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx, Geocache Listing Guideline II., 1., 3.:Geocache Contents says:

 

"Geocache containers include a logsheet or logbook.

For all physical caches, there must be a logbook, scroll or other type of log for geocachers to record their visit."

 

That does not say that the logbook, scroll or other type of log must not be physically attached to the "container".

I don't see that a flat magnet with a log on the back side violates the guidelines. Please quote me where in the guidelines it does require a separate container (with URL please).

I am not a volunteer reviewer, and I am not a lackey. I don't even play one on TV.

 

But my understanding is that a flat magnet with a log attached to the back is okay: the magnet is the "container" and it "contains" the log between itself and the metal surface. And my understanding is that a flat magnet where finders sign the back of the magnet itself is not okay: the magnet can be the "container" or it can be the "log", but it cannot be both.

 

But an actual volunteer reviewer or lackey may step up to correct this if I am mistaken.

Link to comment

I have found several like this. Always enjoyable, infinitely better than a lame film can under a lamppost skirt.

 

It was abused. As is typically the case--give a cacher an envelope and he will push it. So guidelines need to be applied.

Does anyone remember the guy who tossed out an empty Nestle water bottle, posted it and told people to bring a scratching device to scratch their names into the plastic bottle. The bottle was the cache, the bottle was the log.

Then there were those who told people to sign a rock, a tree trunk, a building.

Then are those finders who, if they can't find the cache will sign the item at ground zero.

Still happens but less often. I visited a Little Free Library cache. The logbook was gone for awhile, people were signing the inside of the LFL, the cache owner wasn't the LFL owner. The cache owner abandoned the cache listing. Yes, I posted an NA (no one else would). The cache was archived by a reviewer for non-responsive owner and defacement of the little library.

Link to comment

I have found several like this. Always enjoyable, infinitely better than a lame film can under a lamppost skirt.

 

It was abused. As is typically the case--give a cacher an envelope and he will push it. So guidelines need to be applied.

Does anyone remember the guy who tossed out an empty Nestle water bottle, posted it and told people to bring a scratching device to scratch their names into the plastic bottle. The bottle was the cache, the bottle was the log.

Then there were those who told people to sign a rock, a tree trunk, a building.

Then are those finders who, if they can't find the cache will sign the item at ground zero.

Still happens but less often. I visited a Little Free Library cache. The logbook was gone for awhile, people were signing the inside of the LFL, the cache owner wasn't the LFL owner. The cache owner abandoned the cache listing. Yes, I posted an NA (no one else would). The cache was archived by a reviewer for non-responsive owner and defacement of the little library.

I had found a cache that was those plastic ties that they use in forestry. The CO placed one right in middle of dozen of them. :unsure: I found it because I got bored looking for the cache and start looking at the plastic ties to see what they said and low and behold, it was the cache! :laughing: It was a good one, but I know its against the guideline.

Link to comment

I have found several like this. Always enjoyable, infinitely better than a lame film can under a lamppost skirt.

It was abused. As is typically the case--give a cacher an envelope and he will push it. So guidelines need to be applied.

Does anyone remember the guy who tossed out an empty Nestle water bottle, posted it and told people to bring a scratching device to scratch their names into the plastic bottle. The bottle was the cache, the bottle was the log.

Then there were those who told people to sign a rock, a tree trunk, a building.

Then are those finders who, if they can't find the cache will sign the item at ground zero.

Still happens but less often. I visited a Little Free Library cache. The logbook was gone for awhile, people were signing the inside of the LFL, the cache owner wasn't the LFL owner. The cache owner abandoned the cache listing. Yes, I posted an NA (no one else would). The cache was archived by a reviewer for non-responsive owner and defacement of the little library.

The examples you noted above seem quite different from a magnetic sign that has a logsheet affixed to the back of it. In your examples, there are no separate logsheets. The magnetic signs I've found have either had (1) a log sheet attached to the back (magnetic) side of the sign or (2) a plastic bag attached with the logsheet inside that plastic bag.

Link to comment

But my understanding is that a flat magnet with a log attached to the back is okay: the magnet is the "container" and it "contains" the log between itself and the metal surface. And my understanding is that a flat magnet where finders sign the back of the magnet itself is not okay: the magnet can be the "container" or it can be the "log", but it cannot be both.

 

Seems like that would be a fun one for a lawyer to argue hehe... What constitutes a container and a separate logsheet if they are actually attached to one another - is it how they are attached? when they became attached? who attached them? We'd end up arguing what's the difference between a paper log taped to a magnet and a fridge magnet where the material with the image/text printed on was glued to the magnet during manufacture. What if someone taped a log sheet to the inside of an ammo can? hehe :)

Link to comment

niraD's summary is quite accurate. Thanks for posting that.

 

The guidelines on this fine point haven't changed since the original thread, several years ago. A cache consists of a container that encloses a logsheet. The container can't be the logsheet.

 

To anyone struggling with splitting hairs, think about why the guidance makes sense. Think cache maintenance. Have you ever found one of these magnet caches where the entire back of the log was jammed full of signatures? Or where the elements had worn all the signatures off?

Link to comment

And yet the funny thing about that is that a log sheet being jammed full of signatures is a function of the size of log sheet, and whether the signatures have worn off is a function of it being exposed to the elements, which it would be if it's just stuck on the back of a magnet, which in my experience rarely provides a reliable weatherproof seal.

 

That said I wasn't disputing niraD's summary, or the logic behind such a guideline, just making light of how virtually impossible it is to word such a guideline/rule to make it watertight, no pun intended.

Edited by funkymunkyzone
Link to comment

niraD's summary is quite accurate. Thanks for posting that.

 

The guidelines on this fine point haven't changed since the original thread, several years ago. A cache consists of a container that encloses a logsheet. The container can't be the logsheet.

 

To anyone struggling with splitting hairs, think about why the guidance makes sense. Think cache maintenance. Have you ever found one of these magnet caches where the entire back of the log was jammed full of signatures? Or where the elements had worn all the signatures off?

 

While I understand this logic to an extent, I don't really agree with it.

 

There is no reason why a magnetic cache which has the log on the back of the magnet itself can't be maintained. The ones of those I have seen are maintained. When the log is full, the owner replaces it. Often this is replacing paper glued to the back. Sometimes the entire magnet is replaced.

 

On the other hand, the ones which I've found which have a plastic baggie attached to the magnet, making them "legal" tend to have wet, unsignable logs as the bags soon rip.

 

I think the case where the owner takes the magnet away and glues a new logsheet to the back is splitting hairs.

Link to comment

To anyone struggling with splitting hairs, think about why the guidance makes sense. Think cache maintenance. Have you ever found one of these magnet caches where the entire back of the log was jammed full of signatures? Or where the elements had worn all the signatures off?

 

Why would anyone care (or have any say in) how maintenance is done? As long as the CO can and does perform maintenance, it should not be a matter for anyone to dispute the container.

Link to comment

I've found a lot of magnetic signs that were cache containers. Most had a plastic bag + logpaper attached, some not. I've signed stones (as intended by the CO) and even once signed a safety jacket (orange, like road workers wear). It's these kinds of things that make caches worth remembering, unlike some run of the mill micro behind a tree.

 

Besides, if the log should be separate from the container, can a CO delete finds of cachers who just put one of their logstickers on the inside of a container (they didn't sign the log, right)? :ph34r:

Link to comment

niraD's summary is quite accurate. Thanks for posting that.

 

The guidelines on this fine point haven't changed since the original thread, several years ago. A cache consists of a container that encloses a logsheet. The container can't be the logsheet.

 

To anyone struggling with splitting hairs, think about why the guidance makes sense. Think cache maintenance. Have you ever found one of these magnet caches where the entire back of the log was jammed full of signatures? Or where the elements had worn all the signatures off?

While the guidance makes some sense when the "container" is a small magnetic strip, I know of a cache where the container is the log. The 'log' currently has 369 signatures on it (based on its find count), and is in no danger of running out of space. In this case, the container is approximately 4' x 7' x 12'.

 

I also know of a cache where there is no container, just a log sheet. Actually, a letter sized yellow pad.

 

Both of these are what I consider great caches.

Link to comment

 

Both of these are what I consider great caches.

 

The quality of the cache has never been a criteria for determining whether or not it should be published.

 

If "great caches" are allowed to violate guidelines, it would be up to a reviewer to decide whether a cache was "good enough" to be published even if it violates the guidelines. Can you imagine the blowback that reviewers would get if they started telling cache owners, "sorry, I won't publish your caches because I don't think it is interesting enough"?

 

 

Link to comment

Some of my favorite cache finds probably violate the letter of the guidelines. However, to me, they don't violate the spirit of the game.

 

In contrast, there was one that complied with both the letter and spirit of the guidelines that would have been much more fun if it hadn't. There was a large, abandoned, graffiti covered item in a rather remote place and someone put a film can and log in it. However, it would have been much more fun had it been one where catchers would have added to the graffiti.

Link to comment

I've found a lot of magnetic signs that were cache containers. Most had a plastic bag + logpaper attached, some not. I've signed stones (as intended by the CO) and even once signed a safety jacket (orange, like road workers wear). It's these kinds of things that make caches worth remembering, unlike some run of the mill micro behind a tree.

 

Besides, if the log should be separate from the container, can a CO delete finds of cachers who just put one of their logstickers on the inside of a container (they didn't sign the log, right)? :ph34r:

 

"Toooo-Che"

perhaps, as well, using a stamp is not signing the log. And by extension is printing really signing a log. Perhaps cursive, which is rarely being taught, is the only correct way to sign a log.

 

Hmmmmmmmmmm

Link to comment

Some of my favorite cache finds probably violate the letter of the guidelines. However, to me, they don't violate the spirit of the game.

 

In contrast, there was one that complied with both the letter and spirit of the guidelines that would have been much more fun if it hadn't. There was a large, abandoned, graffiti covered item in a rather remote place and someone put a film can and log in it. However, it would have been much more fun had it been one where catchers would have added to the graffiti.

We have been to events with walls and such where you "signed in" from everything from sharpies to spray cans, and even a park that opened an area for it on a structure (gonna be replaced anyway...).

- But I'd think few would think it much more fun to "tag" an item not meant for it/not belonging to them.

 

"Spirit of the game" places responsibility for fair play on the player, to have mutual respect and agreed upon rules (guidelines). :)

Edited by cerberus1
Link to comment

niraD's summary is quite accurate. Thanks for posting that.

 

The guidelines on this fine point haven't changed since the original thread, several years ago. A cache consists of a container that encloses a logsheet. The container can't be the logsheet.

 

To anyone struggling with splitting hairs, think about why the guidance makes sense. Think cache maintenance. Have you ever found one of these magnet caches where the entire back of the log was jammed full of signatures? Or where the elements had worn all the signatures off?

OK so I am clear on this if I took a magnet and taped some rite in the rain paper to the back that could be changed that would be OK? I had one out like that but changed it to have a ziplock baggie on the back so it would have a "Container" It doesn't work as well but wanted it to be legit. I would rather it lay flat then have the baggie on it.

Link to comment
On 10.6.2013 at 9:34 AM, RubyandCo said:

Hi there

 

I recently found a series of caches which used magnetic signs but you actually wrote on the back of the sign on a printed log on the back(not a piece of paper in the back).

 

I've contacted the CO a couple of times, but he hasn't replied so was wondering if anyone had come across these before and if so where could you buy them - I'm in the UK

 

Thanks in advance

Even here in Portugal. They are very common specially close/on public toilets xD. I quite like this type of format cache. Certainly a good idea as a waypoint for multicaches. I myself have 2 of these in Sesimbra, Portugal. They are easy to make. You can get any type of sign of the internet. These are the magnets i used: https://goo.gl/CJ1Jtp

they are quite strong noedymium magnets of of Banggood. Pack of 50 about 3$.
they can simply be superglued to the back of the sign. For muggles it woun't be different than any other sign. xD

Sorry if i made any mistakes

DSC_4452.JPG

Link to comment

So it’s 2019 and I’m only a year old geocacher but finding these magnetic sheet logs here or there. I’ve read the views of others on the issues and smile about what is really going on. First I do trackables and note that many trackable dog tags are issued with Q codes. Is the intent not to eventually just let your phone scan that code and have the app report the find.  There is already an app for reading the code on a trackable! How far away are we from printing a Qcode on our caches such that scanning that code is our find and equivalent to a signature? Will we need a large container for that little code?

lets go back to what started this geocaching hobby!  A significant change in technology on how to navigate. No one is insisting that we get the cach coordinates but continue to use old technology to get there. We have smart phones and very good gps units to do that job. 

So we discover that a magnetic sheet can cover a writable substance that reduces our use of paper, eliminates another bit of garbage in the environment and makes a hide even more muggle proof?  And we insist on a hundreds years old method of record keeping?  A pencil and paper. 

Seems like a real serious separation of using a modern technology blindsided in development by constricted ancient practices!

Link to comment
2 hours ago, billfern said:

So it’s 2019 and I’m only a year old geocacher but finding these magnetic sheet logs here or there. I’ve read the views of others on the issues and smile about what is really going on. First I do trackables and note that many trackable dog tags are issued with Q codes. Is the intent not to eventually just let your phone scan that code and have the app report the find.  There is already an app for reading the code on a trackable! How far away are we from printing a Qcode on our caches such that scanning that code is our find and equivalent to a signature? Will we need a large container for that little code?

lets go back to what started this geocaching hobby!  A significant change in technology on how to navigate. No one is insisting that we get the cach coordinates but continue to use old technology to get there. We have smart phones and very good gps units to do that job. 

So we discover that a magnetic sheet can cover a writable substance that reduces our use of paper, eliminates another bit of garbage in the environment and makes a hide even more muggle proof?  And we insist on a hundreds years old method of record keeping?  A pencil and paper. 

Seems like a real serious separation of using a modern technology blindsided in development by constricted ancient practices!

change is hard for a lot of folks.

 

Look at the complaints for updating the maps. You would think it was the end of the world.

 

My favorite series was PBM Phone Booth Multis Took you all around town an out of town to get phone numbers to lead you to the next WP final a lot of the time was a magnetic strip on the bottom of phone with a log glued to it.

 

I love all kinds of caches from dna tubes on stop signs to ammo cans in the woods. You need all kinds. If folks don't like a type of cache skip them quit claiming things are running the game or adhering to your code. it is all good. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, billfern said:

So we discover that a magnetic sheet can cover a writable substance that reduces our use of paper, eliminates another bit of garbage in the environment and makes a hide even more muggle proof?  

 

This is not allowed by the current guidelines. Physical logbook must be replaceable and enclosed within a container. You need at least two separate parts to fullfill these requirements.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
13 hours ago, billfern said:

So it’s 2019 and I’m only a year old geocacher but finding these magnetic sheet logs here or there. I’ve read the views of others on the issues and smile about what is really going on. First I do trackables and note that many trackable dog tags are issued with Q codes. Is the intent not to eventually just let your phone scan that code and have the app report the find.  There is already an app for reading the code on a trackable! How far away are we from printing a Qcode on our caches such that scanning that code is our find and equivalent to a signature? Will we need a large container for that little code?

lets go back to what started this geocaching hobby!  A significant change in technology on how to navigate. No one is insisting that we get the cach coordinates but continue to use old technology to get there. We have smart phones and very good gps units to do that job. 

So we discover that a magnetic sheet can cover a writable substance that reduces our use of paper, eliminates another bit of garbage in the environment and makes a hide even more muggle proof?  And we insist on a hundreds years old method of record keeping?  A pencil and paper. 

Seems like a real serious separation of using a modern technology blindsided in development by constricted ancient practices!

 

May be surprising to you (start date n all...), but many of us don't use a phone to cache.   

We simply don't cache like you.   Why should we change when we see regularly that in many examples we're doing okay as-is.   :)

  • Upvote 5
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
On 3/30/2019 at 5:09 AM, billfern said:

So it’s 2019 and I’m only a year old geocacher but finding these magnetic sheet logs here or there. I’ve read the views of others on the issues and smile about what is really going on. First I do trackables and note that many trackable dog tags are issued with Q codes. Is the intent not to eventually just let your phone scan that code and have the app report the find.  There is already an app for reading the code on a trackable! How far away are we from printing a Qcode on our caches such that scanning that code is our find and equivalent to a signature? Will we need a large container for that little code?

 

 

Q (QR?) codes are handy. Problem is they are too handy. Scanning the code is no proof you have actually been there. You could have received the code by email to your cleverphone.

Hell, to this day, in 2019, if I receive electric document to sign I still have to print, sign with pen and scan it.

Who would make a secure system that absolute proves you personally have visited some place that can't be misused. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, papu66 said:

Who would make a secure system that absolute proves you personally have visited some place that can't be misused.

 

I would :D It contains a Credit card reader and you verify your visit by entering your PIN-code. But HQ will not give permission to make a cache without physical replaceable logbook.

  • Funny 2
Link to comment
On 3/30/2019 at 4:09 AM, billfern said:

So it’s 2019 and I’m only a year old geocacher but finding these magnetic sheet logs here or there. I’ve read the views of others on the issues and smile about what is really going on. First I do trackables and note that many trackable dog tags are issued with Q codes. Is the intent not to eventually just let your phone scan that code and have the app report the find.  There is already an app for reading the code on a trackable! How far away are we from printing a Qcode on our caches such that scanning that code is our find and equivalent to a signature? Will we need a large container for that little code?

lets go back to what started this geocaching hobby!  A significant change in technology on how to navigate. No one is insisting that we get the cach coordinates but continue to use old technology to get there. We have smart phones and very good gps units to do that job. 

So we discover that a magnetic sheet can cover a writable substance that reduces our use of paper, eliminates another bit of garbage in the environment and makes a hide even more muggle proof?  And we insist on a hundreds years old method of record keeping?  A pencil and paper. 

Seems like a real serious separation of using a modern technology blindsided in development by constricted ancient practices!

 

This hobby is called geocaching for a reason, It is based on finding caches, which in real life (as opposed to computer speak) has (since the 18th century according to  the O.E.D.  ) been a word for hidden containers. Containers may be simply defined as things able to contain stuff. So flat magnetic strips are not caches .  Writing on (biodegradeable, therefore not a long term problem to the environment) paper found within that container is simple, cheap, reliable, and only apparently a challenge to a few cachers who cannot remember to take a pen. Sometimes methods survive for hundreds of years because they work very well .Pens and pencils are ubiquitous, cheap, light weight, easily available, use no power, are not dependent on operating system, function in the dark and the rain and the snow and the cold , and are not so delicate that if you drop them on a rock they stop working.

 

As for environmental issues, a book or strip of totally biodegradeable paper is far preferable to  a plastic magnetic strip, which is not even slightly biodegradeable , and the solvent or new coat of paint required to refresh that writing surface will have a negative environmental impact too. And those trackables ? Where do they get moved to in the brave new world of QR codes without containers ?

 

It seems to me your fondness for the new and shiny would be better catered to by the QR code game,  the ALC experiment, or any of the apps out there which have virtual targets to hunt.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 5
  • Love 1
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, arisoft said:

 

I would :D It contains a Credit card reader and you verify your visit by entering your PIN-code. But HQ will not give permission to make a cache without physical replaceable logbook.

 

"Hello, is that the bank ? There is an unauthorised withdrawal on my card . No, of course I haven't given anyone my pin number .... oh, hang on a minute ... "

  • Funny 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, papu66 said:

Who would make a secure system that absolute proves you personally have visited some place that can't be misused. 

 

I have a couple of "Verisign" keychains that display a new number every few minutes, synchronized (I guess) to a master system. If there was a cyclic number at a cache, finders may only see it while at the spot, although the requirement to be data-connected (to send the current active number code), means that the number could also be sent to an armchair caching friend.

 

But let's say we develop a foolproof way to prove a cache was found. Many alleged Geocachers unwilling or unable to perform the task at this cache, demand the Smiley anyway. “It was broken when I tried it, whatever, Smile me!” Don't underestimate the willingness of Geocachers to misuse caches.  A CO that I know gets that kind of thing all the time.  :ph34r:

Link to comment

Today I went around town to pickup the highly favorited caches to get my Carnival souvenir. The funny thing is so many of them would no longer be published, yet GS is promoting favorites. One was a lock box attached to a power pole try getting permission for that.  My favorite was my last cache of the day, and the subject of this thread.  Just happens to be the most favorited cache in the neighborhood I recently moved too. Almost had me stumped. Very cleverly done. And with 79 favorite points from 194 finds  obviously the cache is well maintained with replacement logs.  

 

IMG_3587.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I have often wondered what's the point of putting an impractical cache container which easily gets wet and/or does not have much log space. Any of these could be made into a multi, where the magnetic strip only contains final coordinates on the back side to a sensible cache box. Would it be less fun that way? Probably it would not attract that many visitors until the favorite points build up.

No offense to builders of clever hides such as the one in previous image, but I personally would like it just as well, seeing coordinates there in large letters.

Edited by papu66
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On 4/1/2019 at 4:21 AM, papu66 said:

I have often wondered what's the point of putting an impractical cache container which easily gets wet and/or does not have much log space. Any of these could be made into a multi, where the magnetic strip only contains final coordinates on the back side to a sensible cache box. Would it be less fun that way? Probably it would not attract that many visitors until the favorite points build up.

No offense to builders of clever hides such as the one in previous image, but I personally would like it just as well, seeing coordinates there in large letters.

 

Many of my favourite caches are like this; they have one or more themed physical stages, which don't have the constraint of needing a log.   Then a nice big cache at the end.    I own a few like this myself.  

 

One reason you don't see more of them I suspect is that multis (and puzzle caches with multiple stages) don't get found as often, so some owners are reluctant to set them.   It is also more effort to set.  

 

 

Link to comment

Well, another favourite cache container is that is often found is an electrical plate.  It is a flat plate, but beveled at the edges.  So the differences between this plate and say a magnetic strip is the hardness and the bevel.  Under the raised bevel, we put magnets, glue the magnets to the electrical plate and use a very thin log, so the magnets don’t get forced off the surface they are supposed to connect to.  This gem looks like an innocent electrical plate on a surface where electrical plates are expected to be. Some Cachers are wise enough buy a gasket and put it under the edges to keep water out.  Or make one.  So what’s the difference here if you take a magnetic tape strip, cut a piece out that is the size of an electrical cover plate, put a gasket around the perimeter to raise it off the surface, put a log under in the space created,  and mount it. Just like the electrical plate that is accepted, you are using magnetism, a space, one side of the container is the magnetic item the tape strip is mounted on.  I think there is enough magnetic force there to still hold it on the item, and a little spray paint will add the cameo.  I don’t see anything wrong with this arrangement if the whole issue is about writing on the strip as a log, then this should satisfy the rules. And cheaper. And no magnets falling off.

Link to comment

I also worried about one of the comments seen above regarding caches on wooden poles.  The comment was made that many caches found today would not be renewed under the new rules, and I agree.  One of the concerns I have about this whole industry..  I have been caching for three weeks in California, and I can suggest that about 30% of what I have found here would no longer be allowed, at least not where I come from.  So if we were to see all those caches be archived, about 30% of the caches in this area would disappear.  Is that a bad thing?  Well yes, although they could be put into the mountains, I am too old to climb much now.  

Frankly putting caches on electrical equipment such as wood poles or transformers or switch boxes is dangerous.  Linemen often use spurs to claim wood poles, and a cache in the wrong place could cause a mishap if a lineman’s spur can’t sink into the wood.  While most electrical equipment is inherently safe, there are failures and explosions, and going near electrical equipment is ridiculous. I’ve been in the electrical power industry over 40 years, and am well aware of the results of explosions of transformers and other items.  My advice, stay away.  Yesterday I found a cache near and electrical installation that was marginally kept, visible wires, open cabinet doors, and you had to lean over this to get the cache.  Sorry, but all this is an accident waiting to happen.

Edited by billfern
Link to comment
2 hours ago, billfern said:

So what’s the difference here if you take a magnetic tape strip, cut a piece out that is the size of an electrical cover plate, put a gasket around the perimeter to raise it off the surface, put a log under in the space created,  and mount it. Just like the electrical plate that is accepted, you are using magnetism, a space, one side of the container is the magnetic item the tape strip is mounted on.  I think there is enough magnetic force there to still hold it on the item, and a little spray paint will add the cameo.  I don’t see anything wrong with this arrangement if the whole issue is about writing on the strip as a log, then this should satisfy the rules. And cheaper. And no magnets falling off.

I get the impression that you think such a magnetic cache would not be allowed. They are allowed, as long as there is a separate log that is signed, rather than just signing the back of the magnet itself. And volunteer reviewers have said as much in posts to the forum.

Link to comment
On 3/31/2019 at 11:20 AM, hal-an-tow said:

 

This hobby is called geocaching for a reason, It is based on finding caches, which in real life (as opposed to computer speak) has (since the 18th century according to  the O.E.D.  ) been a word for hidden containers. Containers may be simply defined as things able to contain stuff. So flat magnetic strips are not caches .  Writing on (biodegradeable, therefore not a long term problem to the environment) paper found within that container is simple, cheap, reliable, and only apparently a challenge to a few cachers who cannot remember to take a pen. Sometimes methods survive for hundreds of years because they work very well .Pens and pencils are ubiquitous, cheap, light weight, easily available, use no power, are not dependent on operating system, function in the dark and the rain and the snow and the cold , and are not so delicate that if you drop them on a rock they stop working.

 

As for environmental issues, a book or strip of totally biodegradeable paper is far preferable to  a plastic magnetic strip, which is not even slightly biodegradeable , and the solvent or new coat of paint required to refresh that writing surface will have a negative environmental impact too. And those trackables ? Where do they get moved to in the brave new world of QR codes without containers ?

 

It seems to me your fondness for the new and shiny would be better catered to by the QR code game,  the ALC experiment, or any of the apps out there which have virtual targets to hunt.

 

 

 

 

 

You are absolutely correct, in all that, no dispute here, and yes, I am only in this game a year, and do thoroughly enjoy it.  Probably.  The pencil will likely never go away, but not so sure about ball point pens, and fountain pens even seem to be coming back.  don’t get me wrong, I am just a mediator type of guy who would like to put caches everywhere, darned these rules, but I do understand them.  I can agree a flat strip of magnetic material is not a cache, but a flat strip of magnetic material can form one side of a cache container.  I see wallet windows being used as a container, two pieces of leather or plastic in one case, with a cache shoved into them and hidden in a thin spot.  so why couldn’t two pieces of plastic that be used, the fact that they are magnetized shouldn’t be the issue because it holds them together.  Let’s think beyond the strip, into a plastic box made of strips, like what else couldn’t be described like that.

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 7
×
×
  • Create New...