How important is the cache description?

[+nikcap]

I usually don't read much of the cache descriptions or log entries before I hunt a cache. I guess it's because I want to make the hunt more difficult or a surprise. Then I stumbled upon the series of Not Tellin' caches, along with several other 'No Hints' caches.

What's the general opinion?

Although, I've heard people describe the puzzles in the above mentioned series as ridiculous or unsoluble without very specific knowledge, there are some folks that give them a big thumbs up.

Thanks

[+drat19]

Well, it looks like the entire series of Not Tellin's that you linked is now down for maintenance...seems a little odd that all 10 of 'em were taken down at once...whassup with that?

 

As for surprise caches, I personally don't care for doing them (no descr.)...I like to know what I'm chasing; but I can see where the idea would be interesting to some (and perhaps many), as long as there were no obvious safety hazards and as long as the diff/terrain ratings were true (for example, to prevent someone with a physical handicap from driving 100 miles for a mystery cache only to end up somewhere where rock-climbing were required, you get the idea).

 

My $.02...

-Dave R. in Biloxi

[+yumitori]

quote:

---

Originally posted by drat19:

 

As for surprise caches, I personally don't care for doing them (no descr.)...I like to know what I'm chasing; but I can see where the idea would be interesting to some (and perhaps many), as long as there were no obvious safety hazards and as long as the diff/terrain ratings were true (for example, to prevent someone with a physical handicap from driving 100 miles for a mystery cache only to end up somewhere where rock-climbing were required, you get the idea).

 

My $.02...

-Dave R. in Biloxi

---

 

Hopefully the Terrain rating is accurate despite the mystery surrounding the cache.

 

Ron/yumitori

 

---

 

Remember what the dormouse said...

[+nikcap]

quote:

---

Originally posted by drat19:

As for surprise caches, I personally don't care for doing them (no descr.)...I like to know what I'm chasing; but I can see where the idea would be interesting to some (and perhaps many), as long as there were no obvious safety hazards and as long as the diff/terrain ratings were true (for example, to prevent someone with a physical handicap from driving 100 miles for a mystery cache only to end up somewhere where rock-climbing were required, you get the idea).

---

 

Agreed, in order for this to be effective, difficulty and terrain ratings need to be correct. I don't believe that a difficult climb, forging water and swamps, or long hikes constitute high difficulty. The idea I have will be more along the lines of 2-3 terrain (slight hills, narrow trails, some bushwhacking, maybe the use of a car, but no 3 mile walks).

[enfanta]

I like to have as much information as possible before I set off after a cache. I don't enjoy navigating in the car and so I'm one of those (rare?) people who appreciates parking coords.

 

I also base my decision on whether and when to look for a cache on the cache description. Poor spelling and grammar make me hesitate (if you can't be bothered to use spell-check, how careful are you going to be with your site selection and cache maintenance?) and clues like "our first hide" and "we just wanted to set one" make me especially leery.

 

Not that I won't look for these caches, but I tend to wait and see what others find first. Some first-timers set excellent caches and some "classic" cachers set lame ones and you can only decide for yourself-- but I'll sit back and wait a while when presented with "Their are some kewl views for photo's. If you see the stump you went to far."

 

Ode to a Pigeon: Roses are Red, Violets are Blue, You Lookin' at Me? YOU LOOKIN' AT ME?! (b. katt, 7/14/03)

[+NattyBooshka]

Usually, we take the descriptions and value them... we did an afternoon's caching in the summer with just the GPSr whilst away for the weekend. We found all but one, with no provious logs, no hints, no car parks... it was fun, a real challenge, but not the kind of thing I'd do everytime!

 

Some people are born great, some achieve greatness, and some just grate

[Dinoprophet]

I'm one of the "thumbs up" people on the Not Tellin' series. Except for NT9, which is very hard and the only one I haven't solved. They developed a bad reputation early on for being too difficult, but I've seen a lot of the ideas behind them batted around the forums and in new caches in more recent days. As to why they're all down, I don't know. Some of them needed serious maintenance, but others did not.

 

I think the lack of description works well with that series, but many of the Not Founds complain about not knowing what they're looking for. I give a lot of thought to my cache descriptions, exactly how much information I want to provide and how much should remain a surprise. I guess I assume others do, too, though that's probably a bad assumption in a lot of cases.

 

Last week I did a cache without reading the description for the first time. It turned out to be a tough 5-part multi. I read the description later, and it included some very good advice about wearing boots, which I happened to not do this time.

 

[+Alan2]

How's this for a minimalist but powerful description:

cache

 

Near the beginning of the new world. Remote Alaska. Be prepared for anything.

 

Check out the only log's no-find response in the two years the cache's been hidden!

 

Alan