Milestones for cache hiders

[+StickBouncer]

I know I have not been caching for long (20 months)but due to mental health problems I am only able to walk or cycle to caches unless I use public transport, which is generally too expensive, or get a lift with another cacher.

As a result apart from a few nemesis caches I have found all I can. To ease my caching addiction I started placing caches and making my own puzzles and fun caches of which I am now approaching 200 hides. Recently I have been thinking about this, If people like myself did not go to the trouble of hiding and maintaining there would be no caching as there would be nothing to look for.

I wonder if Groundspeak could introduce milestones for number of caches hidden the same as for finding in recognition of the work done by hiders.

 

Carrying on with that thought why not introduce a scoring system so that all finders could score their cache experience out of 10 this could then be averaged and shown on the cache page so that finders would have an idea of the quality of the cache this would also encourage hiders to think about the quality of the overall experience their new cache may bring and of course encourage greater maintenance.

 

Just my thoughts what do you think???

[+J Grouchy]

 

Carrying on with that thought why not introduce a scoring system so that all finders could score their cache experience out of 10 this could then be averaged and shown on the cache page so that finders would have an idea of the quality of the cache this would also encourage hiders to think about the quality of the overall experience their new cache may bring and of course encourage greater maintenance.

 

 

I'm not on board for the "hider" milestone idea only because it would tend to encourage low quality hides.

 

As for your other point...I'd almost prefer "Quality Points" over "Favorites". Instead of a binary system that Favorites provide, Quality Points would tend to give a better feedback as to how much (or how little) cachers enjoy the cache itself.

[+Ma & Pa]

There was a caching contest around here a couple of years ago where one of the methods of getting oints was to have the cache with the most favorite points. It wasn't long before there was a lot of self promoting going on with emails to cachers encouraging them to find certain caches and give favorites. I can see problems of this type with some kind of scoring system.

 

BTW here is a link to a site with a list of cachers with more than 100 hides

 

http://www.zinnware.com/HighAdv/Geocaching/most_caches_found.php?OrderBy=hides&Ordering=DESC&Limit=3500

[+L0ne.R]

As a CO we are rewarded for our efforts with good feedback in the online logs (and favourite points).

 

For example: "...found Heinz. He's a cutie! Put in a plastic acorn in case Heinz gets hungry. Will give him a favourites point."; "What a great cache. It's nice to see someone put so much effort into placement, container, camo, and stamp. No reason not to give this one a favourite."; "Hahahaha, loved this cache full of ghoulish garb."

 

At least for me, that is motivation enough to hide a few good caches and maintain them so the quality of the experience remains high for all visitors. Encouraging quantity with a scoring system, IMO, would be a detriment to the game.

Edited November 20, 2013 by L0ne R

[+briansnat]

I'd be dead against any sort of awards or milestone recognition for hiders. The last thing we need is to encourage more hides.

 

As a CO we are rewarded for our efforts with good feedback in the online logs (and favourite points).

 

Agreed. As a cache owner the only reward I want is knowing that people enjoyed my cache.

[+StickBouncer]

I agree with you and I enjoy the logs I get although TFTC and cut and paste do sometimes get frustrating. That is why I hide good caches. But wish there was a way to up the quality of hides( I loath magnetic nano containers and finding a series of film canisters can get tiresome). I am not interested in league tables or being the best only the best i can be.

 

I think the idea of quality points is worth considering as it will give a more accurate idea of the cache. Some of my caches only get found once or twice a year and so not many fav points where as a different cache that is found more often can accumulate more fav points so the first that got a point off the 2 people who found it in a year appears less desirable than the one that got 5 points off the 20 people that found it

[+fbingha]

Plug the COs name into the profile option at project-gc.com and look for the favorites %. It is something to start with, albeit flawed in many ways.

 

It does illustrate that those with thousands of hides have an abysmal favorites %.

[+niraD]

I wonder if Groundspeak could introduce milestones for number of caches hidden the same as for finding in recognition of the work done by hiders.

One of the things I appreciate about Groundspeak is that they avoid encouraging additional hides. They don't publish challenge caches that require hides, they don't publish "seed caches" that strongly encourage hides, they don't offer sweepstakes entries for new hides, and so on. I consider this a good thing. I don't think anyone should hide a cache for any reason other than the desire to own and maintain a cache.

 

Carrying on with that thought why not introduce a scoring system so that all finders could score their cache experience out of 10 this could then be averaged and shown on the cache page so that finders would have an idea of the quality of the cache this would also encourage hiders to think about the quality of the overall experience their new cache may bring and of course encourage greater maintenance.

Are you familiar with GCVote?

 

I don't think a 5-point rating system produces accurate data. A 10-point rating system would be even worse. As it is, people already award Favorites points for any number of reasons that I disagree with. (And to be honest, I award Favorites points for reasons that others disagree with.) Switching to a points system wouldn't change anything. People would give high ratings (and low ratings) for reasons that others disagree with.

 

A ratings system won't give an accurate "score" of any kind. And frankly, neither will the current Favorites system. But that isn't the point of the Favorites system. The point is merely to call attention to caches that are considered favorites by other geocachers. And it does that, without creating the opportunity for members to slam caches or cache owners with 1-star ratings.

[+CanadianRockies]

Some of my caches only get found once or twice a year and so not many fav points where as a different cache that is found more often can accumulate more fav points so the first that got a point off the 2 people who found it in a year appears less desirable than the one that got 5 points off the 20 people that found it

That's one reason why looking at the favorite point's percentage sometimes can be helpful.

[+L0ne.R]

Plug the COs name into the profile option at project-gc.com and look for the favorites %. It is something to start with, albeit flawed in many ways.

 

It does illustrate that those with thousands of hides have an abysmal favorites %.

 

Interesting. Thanks fbingha. It's amazing how much statistical information you can get from the Project-GC site. Our stats are:

123 favorite points on his/her 52 caches. An average of 2.4 points per cache.

Wish it would also allow us to filter out our archived caches (about half of those caches were pre-favorite votes).

[+BAMBOOZLE]

I agree with what is being said here but I never thought about it that way before. Surely power trails are the result of " Find " awards and had there been " Hide " awards the trails would dwarf those of today.

[+SwineFlew]

I'd be dead against any sort of awards or milestone recognition for hiders. The last thing we need is to encourage more hides.

 

As a CO we are rewarded for our efforts with good feedback in the online logs (and favourite points).

 

Agreed. As a cache owner the only reward I want is knowing that people enjoyed my cache.

Amen. Just think of hundreds of more powertrails!!

[+The_Incredibles_]

The best reward is interesting logs. Any type of 'points' gets boring after a while....

[+briansnat]

The best reward is interesting logs. Any type of 'points' gets boring after a while....

 

As a cache owner the only thing I'm interested is knowing if someone enjoyed my cache. Though I'd prefer an interesting log, the favorite point is just fine.

[+WarNinjas]

The app I use has some kind of a 5 star rating and I am shocked when I see someone has used it. I am guessing it is the same person of a couple of people. I have never checked to see if any of mine have been rated but ones I am looking for I will notice that there is a 3 star rating. Usually I think this is kind of rude once I find the hide and like it and wonder why someone would feel the need to rate it a 3? Not that rating it is bad but just not sure why one would do it.

[+niraD]

Usually I think this is kind of rude once I find the hide and like it and wonder why someone would feel the need to rate it a 3?

What's rude about rating a something as "average"?

 

If you're going to bother with a 5-star rating system of some sort, then it makes sense to rate them all. What's the alternative? Do you expect only ratings of 5 (best) or ratings of 1 (worst)?

[+TriciaG]

Most of the ones I rate (with a secondary app) are 2.5 or 3 out of 5. Most of the caches I find are average, ho-hum caches. Others may think they're the best in the world, so they can rate it a 5 if they choose.

[+L0ne.R]

Most of the ones I rate (with a secondary app) are 2.5 or 3 out of 5. Most of the caches I find are average, ho-hum caches. Others may think they're the best in the world, so they can rate it a 5 if they choose.

 

I agree. Most caches are average, which is to be expected.

 

Personally, average is good - a decent hide, a decent location, a decent container. Example: a small lock n lock, in a city park, in a stump, in good shape. I am happy to seek out average caches. It's the below average caches that I'll skip.

Below average (below 3) for me would include: a micro where a larger cache could be hidden; a messy cache where it's obvious the CO doesn't care; a poor quality container choice; an unattractive location

[+The Rat]

I agree with most of what has been said. A good log is the best reward and I'd be opposed to official milestones for COs. Favorite points are marginally useful, but often misleading. I give out my favorite points sparingly, but I do think they are a feature worth keeping and I enjoy when people give my caches a favorite point. I do think that COs are often underappreciated, especially the ones that do extra good quality caches. I tried to create a challenge cache that rewarded CO's with a lot of finds on their caches, but Groundspeak doesn't allow that. We don't need more caches, but we do need more good quality caches. My best advice is on a good quality cache not to log the TFTC on your smart phone and instead wait until you can get home and type up a nice long log that praises the quality of the cache or tells a funny story about it or posts a picture of the big smile when you found it.

[Clan Riffster]

I wonder if Groundspeak could introduce milestones for number of caches hidden the same as for finding in recognition of the work done by hiders.

Is it accurate to say Groundspeak awards milestones? I know there are several geocoin production companies that make stuff for celebrating milestones, (100 finds, 1000 finds, etc), and I know you, or your friends, can purchase these from Groundspeak. But if I have to buy it, is it really an award? Does Groundspeak give any kind of award for caches found? Medals? Certificates? Souvenirs? Anything?

 

Unless I'm really missing something, Groundspeak doesn't have any official recognition process, either for caches hidden, or found. If you wanted something similar to what is available to cache finders, you could contact one of the many coin makers who partner with Groundspeak, and give them your thoughts. If there is already a coin for number of caches hidden, they will tell you. If not, you could submit some design ideas. If the coins catch on, Groundspeak might add them to their inventory.

 

123 favorite points on his/her 52 caches. An average of 2.4 points per cache.

It would be kewl if there were a way to figure percentages based only on active hides. When I punched in my numbers, it shows 442 favorite points. Not counting events, and caches I've adopted out, I currently own 79 physical caches. If my math is up to snuff, that's 5.59 points per cache. If I remove the 36 archived physical caches, and their 25 favorite points, it brings me to 417 favorite points on 43 physical caches, which, (again assuming I didn't flub the math), gives me 9.69 favorite points per cache.

 

That's a much happier number!

 

Maybe we could create socks, and have them adopt our archived caches?

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

I wonder if Groundspeak could introduce milestones for number of caches hidden the same as for finding in recognition of the work done by hiders.

Is it accurate to say Groundspeak awards milestones? I know there are several geocoin production companies that make stuff for celebrating milestones, (100 finds, 1000 finds, etc), and I know you, or your friends, can purchase these from Groundspeak. But if I have to buy it, is it really an award? Does Groundspeak give any kind of award for caches found? Medals? Certificates? Souvenirs? Anything?

 

Unless I'm really missing something, Groundspeak doesn't have any official recognition process, either for caches hidden, or found. If you wanted something similar to what is available to cache finders, you could contact one of the many coin makers who partner with Groundspeak, and give them your thoughts. If there is already a coin for number of caches hidden, they will tell you. If not, you could submit some design ideas. If the coins catch on, Groundspeak might add them to their inventory.

 

I believe SB was referring to the standard GS milestones listed in our profiles.

Edited November 22, 2013 by Sharks-N-Beans

[Clan Riffster]

I wonder if Groundspeak could introduce milestones for number of caches hidden the same as for finding in recognition of the work done by hiders.

Is it accurate to say Groundspeak awards milestones? I know there are several geocoin production companies that make stuff for celebrating milestones, (100 finds, 1000 finds, etc), and I know you, or your friends, can purchase these from Groundspeak. But if I have to buy it, is it really an award? Does Groundspeak give any kind of award for caches found? Medals? Certificates? Souvenirs? Anything?

 

Unless I'm really missing something, Groundspeak doesn't have any official recognition process, either for caches hidden, or found. If you wanted something similar to what is available to cache finders, you could contact one of the many coin makers who partner with Groundspeak, and give them your thoughts. If there is already a coin for number of caches hidden, they will tell you. If not, you could submit some design ideas. If the coins catch on, Groundspeak might add them to their inventory.

 

I believe SB was referring to the standard GS milestones listed in our profiles.

You may very well be right. Since I'm not a premium member, my viewable stats are rather truncated, so I never thought about them.

[+L0ne.R]

123 favorite points on his/her 52 caches. An average of 2.4 points per cache.

It would be kewl if there were a way to figure percentages based only on active hides. When I punched in my numbers, it shows 442 favorite points. Not counting events, and caches I've adopted out, I currently own 79 physical caches. If my math is up to snuff, that's 5.59 points per cache. If I remove the 36 archived physical caches, and their 25 favorite points, it brings me to 417 favorite points on 43 physical caches, which, (again assuming I didn't flub the math), gives me 9.69 favorite points per cache.

 

That's a much happier number!

 

Maybe we could create socks, and have them adopt our archived caches?

 

Never thought to do the math myself, doh! I get a rating of 4.77 FPs on our 9 active caches. Your 9.69 FP rating is impressive. But I've seen some of your ammo cans on pinterest so I know why you get so many, that and the alligators.

Edited November 23, 2013 by L0ne R

[JASTA 11]

There's hiders in our area with over 100 hides each. A few are special, but the vast majority are nothing to write home about. Many of them have had 'needs maintenance' logs open on them for months.

 

Between motivating players to hide large numbers of lower quality caches just to earn an icon on their profile, and them hiding more than they can (or intend to) maintain, I'd have to give this a thumbs down.

[+-CJ-]

As for scoring systems I can share our experience (at the national website). A 5-star rating system was introduced years ago (1 - worst, 5 - best). After years it can be seen that people have rated different things. Many cachers have given good points to caches just because they've enjoyed the places. A typical plastic box under a tree in an obvious hiding place got 5 points because the ancient church nearby was very interesting. On the other hand, some caches got the same 5 points because they were very creative though located in a bog with no places of interest around. It became clear soon that geocachers used to award point depending on their emotions/feelings. Sometimes a cache could get 1 just because it was damp in the area and the cache hunter didn't think about good waterproof boots. In other situations people gave a rather simple and not creative cache 5 points because they came there in a good company.

 

As for milestones, I would only like to have the number of hidden caches to be added to the number of finds in logs and in public profile. For example, it's

 

[ Avatar ]

[smiley] 455

 

and could be

 

[ Avatar ]

[smiley] 455 [star] 51

Edited November 24, 2013 by -CJ-

[cezanne]

As for scoring systems I can share our experience (at the national website). A 5-star rating system was introduced years ago (1 - worst, 5 - best). After years it can be seen that people have rated different things. Many cachers have given good points to caches just because they've enjoyed the places. A typical plastic box under a tree in an obvious hiding place got 5 points because the ancient church nearby was very interesting. On the other hand, some caches got the same 5 points because they were very creative though located in a bog with no places of interest around. It became clear soon that geocachers used to award point depending on their emotions/feelings. Sometimes a cache could get 1 just because it was damp in the area and the cache hunter didn't think about good waterproof boots. In other situations people gave a rather simple and not creative cache 5 points because they came there in a good company.

 

Is off-topic here, but let me comment on the above nevertheless.

If you think of the score as degree of enjoyment and not as a grade like in school this definitely makes sense and is fully ok.

Also when writing my logs, I have no intent whatsoever to grade/evaluate a cache. For me it is only important how much I liked the cache at this particular day.

 

By using clever algorithms one could extract recommendations for cachers from such a scoring system in that it would be able to match cachers who have similar preferences. A grading system however would be of no use for me.

 

Cezanne

[+RenMin]

I'd be dead against any sort of awards or milestone recognition for hiders. The last thing we need is to encourage more hides.

 

As a CO we are rewarded for our efforts with good feedback in the online logs (and favourite points).

 

Agreed. As a cache owner the only reward I want is knowing that people enjoyed my cache.

 

How did you feel about the "31 Days" challenge which, at least in our area, promoted more cache placements?

 

It seems most don't care about quality of hide and gobble up the park and grabs. A quality multi and puzzle gets little traffic compared to

The magnetic GRC.

 

I think something to "reward" COs for quality and quantity should be considered but with care so any new caches it encourages are better.

 

I also agree that the satisfaction we get comes from finds, good logs/ feedback, and fav points.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

As for scoring systems I can share our experience (at the national website). A 5-star rating system was introduced years ago (1 - worst, 5 - best). After years it can be seen that people have rated different things. Many cachers have given good points to caches just because they've enjoyed the places. A typical plastic box under a tree in an obvious hiding place got 5 points because the ancient church nearby was very interesting. On the other hand, some caches got the same 5 points because they were very creative though located in a bog with no places of interest around. It became clear soon that geocachers used to award point depending on their emotions/feelings. Sometimes a cache could get 1 just because it was damp in the area and the cache hunter didn't think about good waterproof boots. In other situations people gave a rather simple and not creative cache 5 points because they came there in a good company.

 

As for milestones, I would only like to have the number of hidden caches to be added to the number of finds in logs and in public profile. For example, it's

 

[ Avatar ]

[smiley] 455

 

and could be

 

[ Avatar ]

[smiley] 455 [star] 51

 

I agree...if you have to list something with the Avatar list hides......finds you do for yourself, hides you do for others.

[+L0ne.R]

As for scoring systems I can share our experience (at the national website). A 5-star rating system was introduced years ago (1 - worst, 5 - best). After years it can be seen that people have rated different things. Many cachers have given good points to caches just because they've enjoyed the places. A typical plastic box under a tree in an obvious hiding place got 5 points because the ancient church nearby was very interesting. On the other hand, some caches got the same 5 points because they were very creative though located in a bog with no places of interest around. It became clear soon that geocachers used to award point depending on their emotions/feelings. Sometimes a cache could get 1 just because it was damp in the area and the cache hunter didn't think about good waterproof boots. In other situations people gave a rather simple and not creative cache 5 points because they came there in a good company.

 

As for milestones, I would only like to have the number of hidden caches to be added to the number of finds in logs and in public profile. For example, it's

 

[ Avatar ]

[smiley] 455

 

and could be

 

[ Avatar ]

[smiley] 455 [star] 51

 

I agree...if you have to list something with the Avatar list hides......finds you do for yourself, hides you do for others.

 

I kind of like the idea, I kind of don't. Listing finds seems to bring out the competitiveness in people, so I can see that listing hides also would make some people want to have a large hide count. I think I'd like to see a hide:FP score instead. Then again, that too may end up being a problem with people beseeching finders to give them a FP so they can have a bigger hide:FP score (or creating sock accounts to up their score).

[+-CJ-]

FP score? Do you mean FPs like "This was my first cache found in Russia hence FP"?

[+BAMBOOZLE]

As for scoring systems I can share our experience (at the national website). A 5-star rating system was introduced years ago (1 - worst, 5 - best). After years it can be seen that people have rated different things. Many cachers have given good points to caches just because they've enjoyed the places. A typical plastic box under a tree in an obvious hiding place got 5 points because the ancient church nearby was very interesting. On the other hand, some caches got the same 5 points because they were very creative though located in a bog with no places of interest around. It became clear soon that geocachers used to award point depending on their emotions/feelings. Sometimes a cache could get 1 just because it was damp in the area and the cache hunter didn't think about good waterproof boots. In other situations people gave a rather simple and not creative cache 5 points because they came there in a good company.

 

As for milestones, I would only like to have the number of hidden caches to be added to the number of finds in logs and in public profile. For example, it's

 

[ Avatar ]

[smiley] 455

 

and could be

 

[ Avatar ]

[smiley] 455 [star] 51

 

I agree...if you have to list something with the Avatar list hides......finds you do for yourself, hides you do for others.

 

I kind of like the idea, I kind of don't. Listing finds seems to bring out the competitiveness in people, so I can see that listing hides also would make some people want to have a large hide count. I think I'd like to see a hide:FP score instead. Then again, that too may end up being a problem with people beseeching finders to give them a FP so they can have a bigger hide:FP score (or creating sock accounts to up their score).

 

Really, I'd just like to see the Avatar only. Listing the found count was kind of cool back when it meant something. I'll never forget the most I've ever been impressed....I called my wife and said come see this, you won't believe it..." this guy has found 70 caches " !! Today you may see 20,000 on someone who has been caching less than 2 years.

[+niraD]

Really, I'd just like to see the Avatar only. Listing the found count was kind of cool back when it meant something. I'll never forget the most I've ever been impressed....I called my wife and said come see this, you won't believe it..." this guy has found 70 caches " !! Today you may see 20,000 on someone who has been caching less than 2 years.

Yeah, I remember a group trip to a night cache in celebration of a friend's 6000th find. That was a lot of finds. Not as many as Alamogul, but still quite a lot. And a lot of local geocachers showed up.

 

A few weeks later, his 7000th find was a random film canister in the Nevada desert. That milestone seemed a lot less significant.

[+L0ne.R]

 

Really, I'd just like to see the Avatar only. Listing the found count was kind of cool back when it meant something. I'll never forget the most I've ever been impressed....I called my wife and said come see this, you won't believe it..." this guy has found 70 caches " !! Today you may see 20,000 on someone who has been caching less than 2 years.

 

I completely agree.

Edited November 26, 2013 by L0ne R

[+NeverSummer]

 

Really, I'd just like to see the Avatar only. Listing the found count was kind of cool back when it meant something. I'll never forget the most I've ever been impressed....I called my wife and said come see this, you won't believe it..." this guy has found 70 caches " !! Today you may see 20,000 on someone who has been caching less than 2 years.

 

I completely agree.

I agree.

 

And I'll add:

I remember when 1000 meant a golden ammo can, an event and a new dedicated cache in your honor. Sadly, I still held out hope that I'd get some kind of a high five when I hit 1000. But, because it took me a while to get there, the norm was 2000+ caches, easy, for someone who had been caching a third of the time I had been at that time. Then, thinking maybe 1500 finds would get me at least a nod in my direction, nada.

 

I know this all varies by cache community, but it is still something I find to be less and less relevant in the grand scheme of the game. I'm happy to see my find count on my profile. If someone wants to see how many I've found, they can look me up. But the number of finds on each log is getting a little bit pointless, and ends up meaning there are some bloated egos in a game where there is no winners.

 

And, to have a milestone for caches hidden isn't far behind. I'd rather not celebrate number of hides until we can see the standardization of cache quality related to number of hides. I want to go out and find 10 well-maintained hides from one person more than I want their 50 (or 2000) wet-log filled film cans. I lived in the land of the "King" for a while, and even as I liked the guy on a personal level, appreciated the smilies and his efforts to get more caches out there, I didn't much care for the cracked containers with wet logs that went without maintenance even when NM logs piled up.

 

Celebrating high numbers of finds will only perpetuate the same issues we see with those who go for numbers of finds over all else. Again, with no winners, I don't care much for the way the numbers incentivize certain behaviours.

Edited November 27, 2013 by NeverSummer

[+Ambrosia]

 

Really, I'd just like to see the Avatar only. Listing the found count was kind of cool back when it meant something. I'll never forget the most I've ever been impressed....I called my wife and said come see this, you won't believe it..." this guy has found 70 caches " !! Today you may see 20,000 on someone who has been caching less than 2 years.

 

I completely agree.

I agree.

 

And I'll add:

I remember when 1000 meant a golden ammo can, an event and a new dedicated cache in your honor. Sadly, I still held out hope that I'd get some kind of a high five when I hit 1000. But, because it took me a while to get there, the norm was 2000+ caches, easy, for someone who had been caching a third of the time I had been at that time. Then, thinking maybe 1500 finds would get me at least a nod in my direction, nada.

 

I know this all varies by cache community, but it is still something I find to be less and less relevant in the grand scheme of the game. I'm happy to see my find count on my profile. If someone wants to see how many I've found, they can look me up. But the number of finds on each log is getting a little bit pointless, and ends up meaning there are some bloated egos in a game where there is no winners.

 

And, to have a milestone for caches hidden isn't far behind. I'd rather not celebrate number of hides until we can see the standardization of cache quality related to number of hides. I want to go out and find 10 well-maintained hides from one person more than I want their 50 (or 2000) wet-log filled film cans. I lived in the land of the "King" for a while, and even as I liked the guy on a personal level, appreciated the smilies and his efforts to get more caches out there, I didn't much care for the cracked containers with wet logs that went without maintenance even when NM logs piled up.

 

Celebrating high numbers of finds will only perpetuate the same issues we see with those who go for numbers of finds over all else. Again, with no winners, I don't care much for the way the numbers incentivize certain behaviours.

I know this is a bit OT, because it's about finding, not hiding. But your post brought back really good memories. My 1000th find was in 2006, and it was one of the highlights of my caching experience.

 

I'd been having huge health problems, and it was a four mile hike (probably the last time I was able to do a hike that big until 2012). A nice group of friends and family took me out to a cache that I'd wanted to do for years (some of those cachers had already done this hike more than once), and crowned me and toasted me with sparkling cider. One of those dear friends has since passed, and I just cherish those memories so much.

 

 

Ebey Bluffs

Edited November 27, 2013 by Ambrosia

[+The Rat]

Milestones do have the advantage of providing an opportunity or occasion for a geocacher to do something particularly memorable. Sometimes you know in advance that there is that special 5/5 cache you want to get with a bunch of best friends, or the resurrected cache in the spot you proposed to your fiancee, or where your child surprised you by putting a message in the cache that you were about to become a grandparent and you can time your finds so that specific cache becomes a milestone. That cache shows up in your stats all the time reminding you of that special day with fond memories. I see that as the significance of milestones. Just finding 1000 or 10,000 or any other particular number is meaningless by itself, IMO. The same goes for the number of hides, but the really nice, long, complimentary logs are special for a CO, and I did get a little thrill when I learned that my caches had over 300 favorite points.