Jump to content

Mystery/Puzzle cache listed as Letterbox Hybrid?


Recommended Posts

Looking at my finds from that user it was more than 2 so I miscounted. But since the "Letterbox" cache doesn't have a stamp it shouldn't be listed as a Letterbox Hybrid.

 

You seem to have a Draconian attitude to situations that don't meet every minute detail of the Guidelines. Maybe it was an oversight by the CO not putting a stamp in it, but unilaterally deciding it Needs Maintenance / Archive is a little severe. And trying to drum up support for your view point isn't constructive.

 

I'm not saying it needs archived. I don't know what "Draconian" is a reference to and I was asking about if I should post a Needs Maintenance since it appears to be a stampless "letterbox" cache.

 

And earlier in this thread you accused the reviewer and cache owner of publishing caches that were incorrectly classified. Maybe a little extra reading on your part then asking a question about why they are traditional caches instead of implying incorrect handling would be a better approach.

 

Where does it say Field Puzzles have to be listed as traditional caches? Why are you saying that field puzzles should be listed as Traditional even though they have puzzle elements?

Edited by Pond Bird
Link to comment

Looking at my finds from that user it was more than 2 so I miscounted. But since the "Letterbox" cache doesn't have a stamp it shouldn't be listed as a Letterbox Hybrid.

 

You seem to have a Draconian attitude to situations that don't meet every minute detail of the Guidelines. Maybe it was an oversight by the CO not putting a stamp in it, but unilaterally deciding it Needs Maintenance / Archive is a little severe. And trying to drum up support for your view point isn't constructive.

 

I'm not saying it needs archived. I don't know what "Draconian" is a reference to and I was asking about if I should post a Needs Maintenance since it appears to be a stampless "letterbox" cache.

 

And earlier in this thread you accused the reviewer and cache owner of publishing caches that were incorrectly classified. Maybe a little extra reading on your part then asking a question about why they are traditional caches instead of implying incorrect handling would be a better approach.

 

Where does it say Field Puzzles have to be listed as traditional caches? Why are you saying that field puzzles should be listed as Traditional even though they have puzzle elements?

 

They can be. It isn't necessarily best practice but it's permitted. Perhaps you should trust reviewers to make the proper judgment calls on other people's caches instead of hounding cache owners over every minor detail.

Link to comment

Looking at my finds from that user it was more than 2 so I miscounted. But since the "Letterbox" cache doesn't have a stamp it shouldn't be listed as a Letterbox Hybrid.

 

You seem to have a Draconian attitude to situations that don't meet every minute detail of the Guidelines. Maybe it was an oversight by the CO not putting a stamp in it, but unilaterally deciding it Needs Maintenance / Archive is a little severe. And trying to drum up support for your view point isn't constructive.

 

I'm not saying it needs archived. I don't know what "Draconian" is a reference to and I was asking about if I should post a Needs Maintenance since it appears to be a stampless "letterbox" cache.

 

And earlier in this thread you accused the reviewer and cache owner of publishing caches that were incorrectly classified. Maybe a little extra reading on your part then asking a question about why they are traditional caches instead of implying incorrect handling would be a better approach.

 

Where does it say Field Puzzles have to be listed as traditional caches? Why are you saying that field puzzles should be listed as Traditional even though they have puzzle elements?

 

They can be. It isn't necessarily best practice but it's permitted. Perhaps you should trust reviewers to make the proper judgment calls on other people's caches instead of hounding cache owners over every minor detail.

 

I'm not hounding caches owners over every minor detail. I think I'll post a Needs Maintenance but don't know how to word it.

Edited by Pond Bird
Link to comment
1468258115[/url]' post='5595905']
1468164947[/url]' post='5595628']

Looking at my finds from that user it was more than 2 so I miscounted. But since the "Letterbox" cache doesn't have a stamp it shouldn't be listed as a Letterbox Hybrid.

 

You seem to have a Draconian attitude to situations that don't meet every minute detail of the Guidelines. Maybe it was an oversight by the CO not putting a stamp in it, but unilaterally deciding it Needs Maintenance / Archive is a little severe. And trying to drum up support for your view point isn't constructive.

 

Needs Maintenance is not severe. It's a useful tool. As a cache owner I value the NM feature and wish others would stop discouraging the use of it. It's a good alert system.

Link to comment

Looking at my finds from that user it was more than 2 so I miscounted. But since the "Letterbox" cache doesn't have a stamp it shouldn't be listed as a Letterbox Hybrid.

 

You seem to have a Draconian attitude to situations that don't meet every minute detail of the Guidelines. Maybe it was an oversight by the CO not putting a stamp in it, but unilaterally deciding it Needs Maintenance / Archive is a little severe. And trying to drum up support for your view point isn't constructive.

 

There are individuals who have built up such a reputation that any reports they make on caches are largely ignored.

Link to comment
1468258115[/url]' post='5595905']
1468164947[/url]' post='5595628']

Looking at my finds from that user it was more than 2 so I miscounted. But since the "Letterbox" cache doesn't have a stamp it shouldn't be listed as a Letterbox Hybrid.

 

You seem to have a Draconian attitude to situations that don't meet every minute detail of the Guidelines. Maybe it was an oversight by the CO not putting a stamp in it, but unilaterally deciding it Needs Maintenance / Archive is a little severe. And trying to drum up support for your view point isn't constructive.

 

Needs Maintenance is not severe. It's a useful tool. As a cache owner I value the NM feature and wish others would stop discouraging the use of it. It's a good alert system.

 

Yes it lets people know, including the CO, that there may be a problem with the cache and they believe the cache can be Checked on/Fixed by the CO.

Edited by Pond Bird
Link to comment

Looking at my finds from that user it was more than 2 so I miscounted. But since the "Letterbox" cache doesn't have a stamp it shouldn't be listed as a Letterbox Hybrid.

 

You seem to have a Draconian attitude to situations that don't meet every minute detail of the Guidelines. Maybe it was an oversight by the CO not putting a stamp in it, but unilaterally deciding it Needs Maintenance / Archive is a little severe. And trying to drum up support for your view point isn't constructive.

 

There are individuals who have built up such a reputation that any reports they make on caches are largely ignored.

 

Sometimes new people do post NM logs on caches where there is no Maintenance needed instead of a Did Not Find log. Other times people think there's a problem because they didn't find it but somebody before (And after) them have found the cache in perfect condition and the owner doesn't post an Owner Maintenance log because there is no maintenance done by him/her. As a cache owner, if anybody believes any of my caches to be missing or in need of maintenance of some sort, I encourage a log letting me know. Some owners ignore NM logs and eventually if the cache is not being maintained at all, then the listing gets archived especially if it has muggled.

 

In this case, it appears the only thing missing is the stamp, the cache appears to be listed in the correct category given that there "was" a stamp in it.

Link to comment
1468258115[/url]' post='5595905']
1468164947[/url]' post='5595628']

Looking at my finds from that user it was more than 2 so I miscounted. But since the "Letterbox" cache doesn't have a stamp it shouldn't be listed as a Letterbox Hybrid.

 

You seem to have a Draconian attitude to situations that don't meet every minute detail of the Guidelines. Maybe it was an oversight by the CO not putting a stamp in it, but unilaterally deciding it Needs Maintenance / Archive is a little severe. And trying to drum up support for your view point isn't constructive.

 

Needs Maintenance is not severe. It's a useful tool. As a cache owner I value the NM feature and wish others would stop discouraging the use of it. It's a good alert system.

 

I agree with you the vast majority of the time but there are exceptions. It seems apparent that some individuals are determined to reach for excuses to use those logs to hound cache owners in a manner that is excessive and unnecessary. NM should not be used to bother cache owners over personal drama and other frivolities.

Link to comment

NM should not be used to bother cache owners over personal drama and other frivolities.

Nothing should be used to bother anyone over personal drama and other frivolities, so I don't think it makes sense to bring up this general point in a discussion about when to post NMs.

Link to comment

NM should not be used to bother cache owners over personal drama and other frivolities.

Nothing should be used to bother anyone over personal drama and other frivolities, so I don't think it makes sense to bring up this general point in a discussion about when to post NMs.

 

This isn't a general post about when to use NM. The discussion is about a specific case involving a geocacher who appears to be causing a considerable amount of trouble for other geocachers.

Link to comment

Hey folks,

 

I'd just like to weigh in on this subject.

 

First off I agree that a Letter box Hybrid cache must have a stamp with the logbook to "qualify" as a letter box. I made a very nice stamp for that cache today.

 

The reason I chose to submit this (The Angel's Hand https://coord.info/GC6CA5F) as a letter box hybrid, was that you had to use clues from the story and around the location to ultimately gain the coordinates for the cache, just as the geocaching guidelines state. I was however lax in placing the stamp with the cache.

 

I hope people please understand that this is not my full time vocation and that cache owners can sometimes get tied up in personal responsibilities that put geocaching on the back burner. I do however value everyone's input and opinion and would never dismiss someone's needs maintenance log, note, or personal message sent to me.

 

On the subject of many of my other caches.

 

I thought a lot about weather they should be submitted as mystery/puzzle caches, traditional caches or multi caches. My experience with the blue question mark is that 99% of the time, the coordinates posted on the cache page are somewhere close in the area and then the puzzle is on the computer to find the real set of coordinates. This can be very difficult for someone like myself with limited computer skills. Over the years I've chosen to ignore most puzzle caches noting that something like a "sudoku" or embedded message puzzle, while it might be a great cache in a beautiful location, it wasn't for me. I feel that my caches are different in that the actual cache location is given and that even if you have difficulty with opening the cache itself, you still get to experience the location and the information on the cache page. I feel that those two things are just as important and set it apart from "most" puzzle caches. If it's a good cache you'll want to go back and try it again. I hope to leave enough clues for people to follow through to a logical conclusion on how to open the cache and if not I always try to help those that ask for it.

 

Remember the listing requirements/guidelines are mostly an attempt to standardize the game and don't always fit each cache perfectly. I try my best as does everyone else to interpret them and make sure that anyone looking for one of my caches knows what to expect before they head out. I'm glad you're asking the questions and I hope you understand a little as to why my caches are submitted the way they are.

Link to comment

Hey folks,

 

I'd just like to weigh in on this subject.

 

First off I agree that a Letter box Hybrid cache must have a stamp with the logbook to "qualify" as a letter box. I made a very nice stamp for that cache today.

 

The reason I chose to submit this (The Angel's Hand https://coord.info/GC6CA5F) as a letter box hybrid, was that you had to use clues from the story and around the location to ultimately gain the coordinates for the cache, just as the geocaching guidelines state. I was however lax in placing the stamp with the cache.

 

I hope people please understand that this is not my full time vocation and that cache owners can sometimes get tied up in personal responsibilities that put geocaching on the back burner. I do however value everyone's input and opinion and would never dismiss someone's needs maintenance log, note, or personal message sent to me.

 

On the subject of many of my other caches.

 

I thought a lot about weather they should be submitted as mystery/puzzle caches, traditional caches or multi caches. My experience with the blue question mark is that 99% of the time, the coordinates posted on the cache page are somewhere close in the area and then the puzzle is on the computer to find the real set of coordinates. This can be very difficult for someone like myself with limited computer skills. Over the years I've chosen to ignore most puzzle caches noting that something like a "sudoku" or embedded message puzzle, while it might be a great cache in a beautiful location, it wasn't for me. I feel that my caches are different in that the actual cache location is given and that even if you have difficulty with opening the cache itself, you still get to experience the location and the information on the cache page. I feel that those two things are just as important and set it apart from "most" puzzle caches. If it's a good cache you'll want to go back and try it again. I hope to leave enough clues for people to follow through to a logical conclusion on how to open the cache and if not I always try to help those that ask for it.

 

Remember the listing requirements/guidelines are mostly an attempt to standardize the game and don't always fit each cache perfectly. I try my best as does everyone else to interpret them and make sure that anyone looking for one of my caches knows what to expect before they head out. I'm glad you're asking the questions and I hope you understand a little as to why my caches are submitted the way they are.

 

You've been very good about maintaining the caches when theres an issue with a field puzzle, or a missing object, etc. I'm glad you're making a stamp and look forward to revisiting the cache location. I've learned that "puzzles" can be any shape or form. Sorry for any confusion towards the caches themselves past, present and future if new geocachers are trying to figure out things too.

Link to comment

The reason I chose to submit this (The Angel's Hand https://coord.info/GC6CA5F) as a letter box hybrid, was that you had to use clues from the story and around the location to ultimately gain the coordinates for the cache, just as the geocaching guidelines state. I was however lax in placing the stamp with the cache.

 

I always thought the letterbox cache type was never defined properly. I do letterboxing, not very often. The main thing that defines a letterbox *to me* are the letterbox style clues (walk 20 paces, turn right by the tree with 3 trunks, etc ...) A letterbox defined on this state is defined *only* by the presence of a stamp. It may have letterbox style clues as well, but that's not what defines a letterbox cache here.

 

Personally, if that's what makes a letterbox hybrid on geocaching.com, then it should be an attribute, not a cache type, as the presence of a stamp doesn't impact how you look for or log a find on a cache. With all the other cache types, the type impacts the hunt.

 

But that's not the rule, so if you have a stamp, call it a letterbox, even if it works more like a traditional or a multi or a puzzle.

Link to comment

The reason I chose to submit this (The Angel's Hand https://coord.info/GC6CA5F) as a letter box hybrid, was that you had to use clues from the story and around the location to ultimately gain the coordinates for the cache, just as the geocaching guidelines state. I was however lax in placing the stamp with the cache.

 

I always thought the letterbox cache type was never defined properly. I do letterboxing, not very often. The main thing that defines a letterbox *to me* are the letterbox style clues (walk 20 paces, turn right by the tree with 3 trunks, etc ...) A letterbox defined on this state is defined *only* by the presence of a stamp. It may have letterbox style clues as well, but that's not what defines a letterbox cache here.

 

As a Letterbox *hybrid*, that suggests that it could be listed on both the geocaching site as well as one of the Letterboxing sites and be "findable" from either site. From what I understand, a Letterbox *can* include lat/long coordinates as "clues" but it seems to me that having lat/long coordinates means you wouldn't need traditional letter box style clues (walk 20 paces, turn right by the tree with 3 trunks).

 

Although it's never going to happen, to me it would have make more sense to require traditional letter box clues for a letterbox hybrid, and the use of lat/long coordinates for the starting point would be what would make it a hybrid.

 

 

Link to comment

 

Although it's never going to happen, to me it would have make more sense to require traditional letter box clues for a letterbox hybrid, and the use of lat/long coordinates for the starting point would be what would make it a hybrid.

 

I agree (and with Chilehead). Though OK to require a stamp as well.

 

Ironically (as Letterboxing started in the England, where I live), around here most Letterbox Hybrids I've seen are traditionals with a stamp. While in other countries I've found most of the Letterbox Hybrids I've found used traditional letterbox clues.

Link to comment

If the cache was ORIGINALLY placed without a stamp then it was mistyped as a Letterbox. But if the stamp goes missing (or destroyed or rots or whatever) then a "Needs Maintenance" log would be appropriate. Same would apply to any cache that was missing a required element (such as a log).

 

From a Geocaching.com point of view, the presence of that stamp trumps all other cache-type classifications. That's what the attributes are for as well as the advisement to "Read the description".

 

I'm leaning toward the idea that it should be the other way around. Letterboxes should adhere to their traditional guidelines (Stamp required, GPS to get to the start and clues/directions to the final).

Edited by Cache O'Plenty
Link to comment

I would just drop the issue. Letterbox caches by nature do not even use GPS cords to find them.

It is based on clues alone. When you mix it with geocaching then you get cords to start.

After that it is fair game. We have a few of the type described in this forum around my area.

Absolutely no problem with the type. The problem here is lack of understanding.

Go read up on it and learn.

Link to comment

I would just drop the issue. Letterbox caches by nature do not even use GPS cords to find them.

It is based on clues alone. When you mix it with geocaching then you get cords to start.

After that it is fair game. We have a few of the type described in this forum around my area.

Absolutely no problem with the type. The problem here is lack of understanding.

Go read up on it and learn.

 

Well, reviewers here (the Netherlands) seem to have a different idea about that. I've seen a new Letterbox sent in recently returned by the reviewer with this comment:

"Voor een Letterbox hybride moet ergens gedurende de tocht significant GPSgebruik aantoonbaar zijn. Onder significant GPS gebruik verstaan we het volgende; Het projecteren van waypoints vanaf een specifieke locatie, die al gedefinieerd is door een set van coördinaten. Of duidelijke coördinaten in de cache beschrijving staan. **De start coördinaten tellen hierbij niet mee.**"

This translates to something like "for a Letterbox Hybrid to be accepted, significant GPS use has to be shown in the route to the cache. With this, we mean the following: a projection of a waypoint from a specified location, that is already defined by a coördinate. Or clear coördinates mentioned in the listing. ** The starting coördinates of the cache do not count for this. **

 

New rules? This doesn't help in getting a Letterbox accepted that is set up according to the fun, tried and tested "pictures with arrows" way . . .

Edited by NLBokkie
Link to comment

 

This translates to something like "for a Letterbox Hybrid to be accepted, significant GPS use has to be shown in the route to the cache. With this, we mean the following: a projection of a waypoint from a specified location, that is already defined by a coördinate. Or clear coördinates mentioned in the listing. ** The starting coördinates of the cache do not count for this. **

 

New rules? This doesn't help in getting a Letterbox accepted that is set up according to the fun, tried and tested "pictures with arrows" way . . .

 

That seems odd. There are clearly many LBH caches which are just a traditional with a stamp. Like a traditional, they just use the posted coordinates.

 

Following on from that, I've seen LBH caches which you need to go to the posted coordinates (that's GPS use), then follow clues.

 

To insist that the GPS is used in the "follow clues" part I find surprising.

Link to comment

 

This translates to something like "for a Letterbox Hybrid to be accepted, significant GPS use has to be shown in the route to the cache. With this, we mean the following: a projection of a waypoint from a specified location, that is already defined by a coördinate. Or clear coördinates mentioned in the listing. ** The starting coördinates of the cache do not count for this. **

 

New rules? This doesn't help in getting a Letterbox accepted that is set up according to the fun, tried and tested "pictures with arrows" way . . .

 

That seems odd. There are clearly many LBH caches which are just a traditional with a stamp. Like a traditional, they just use the posted coordinates.

 

Following on from that, I've seen LBH caches which you need to go to the posted coordinates (that's GPS use), then follow clues.

 

To insist that the GPS is used in the "follow clues" part I find surprising.

Maybe I'm just off today, and it might be in the translation, but it sounds similar to me.

I see it as GPS usage has to be used somewhere in the finding of a LBH, and simply entering coordinates to parking,trailhead (spots not part of the actual search), isn't enough to satisfy the "significant GPS usage" part of it.

Link to comment

 

This translates to something like "for a Letterbox Hybrid to be accepted, significant GPS use has to be shown in the route to the cache. With this, we mean the following: a projection of a waypoint from a specified location, that is already defined by a coördinate. Or clear coördinates mentioned in the listing. ** The starting coördinates of the cache do not count for this. **

 

New rules? This doesn't help in getting a Letterbox accepted that is set up according to the fun, tried and tested "pictures with arrows" way . . .

 

That seems odd. There are clearly many LBH caches which are just a traditional with a stamp. Like a traditional, they just use the posted coordinates.

 

Following on from that, I've seen LBH caches which you need to go to the posted coordinates (that's GPS use), then follow clues.

 

To insist that the GPS is used in the "follow clues" part I find surprising.

 

There are a lot of LBH in Los Angeles area that are almost pure puzzles. The coordinates are for the icon to show on the map, but the rest is all puzzle / clue based.

Link to comment

I probably misread it. I read it as there must be stages doing things like projecting coordinates, when of course it can just be a trad with a stamp.

 

I've found several puzzle caches (as well as LBH) where the posted coordinates take you to the start, and you follow clues only. These probably aren't allowed, but often hard for the reviewer to tell.

 

Then there will be grey areas. If I say go to the posted coordinates, then walk 50 meters at a bearing of 206 degrees, I expect that to be allowed. You don't need to use a GPS for that, but projecting a waypoint would be the most accurate way. But I don't see how the cache page could require use of waypoint projection.

Link to comment

I've found several puzzle caches (as well as LBH) where the posted coordinates take you to the start, and you follow clues only. These probably aren't allowed, but often hard for the reviewer to tell.

The problem, as I understand it, is that it's easy to write letterbox instructions that bypass the starting coordinates. If the instructions say "Start at the Frobaz Trailhead", then the GPS isn't needed, and that's what they're trying to prevent. (Personally, I'm not sure why this purity feature is important to GS, but I don't mind this eccentricity.) So the most common way to avoid the problem is for the instructions to be useless until you get to the posted coordinates. Hence a LBH at the posted coordinates is fine: you have to go to the posted coordinates, and only then is the instruction "look right there" helpful.

Link to comment

If the cache was ORIGINALLY placed without a stamp then it was mistyped as a Letterbox. But if the stamp goes missing (or destroyed or rots or whatever) then a "Needs Maintenance" log would be appropriate. Same would apply to any cache that was missing a required element (such as a log).

 

From a Geocaching.com point of view, the presence of that stamp trumps all other cache-type classifications. That's what the attributes are for as well as the advisement to "Read the description".

 

I'm leaning toward the idea that it should be the other way around. Letterboxes should adhere to their traditional guidelines (Stamp required, GPS to get to the start and clues/directions to the final).

 

Probably was mistyped, but now the owner is performing maintenance by putting a stamp in the cache so that it is a letterbox hybrid.

Link to comment

This translates to something like "for a Letterbox Hybrid to be accepted, significant GPS use has to be shown in the route to the cache. With this, we mean the following: a projection of a waypoint from a specified location, that is already defined by a coördinate. Or clear coördinates mentioned in the listing. ** The starting coördinates of the cache do not count for this. **

 

New rules? This doesn't help in getting a Letterbox accepted that is set up according to the fun, tried and tested "pictures with arrows" way . . .

 

That seems odd. There are clearly many LBH caches which are just a traditional with a stamp. Like a traditional, they just use the posted coordinates.

 

Following on from that, I've seen LBH caches which you need to go to the posted coordinates (that's GPS use), then follow clues.

 

To insist that the GPS is used in the "follow clues" part I find surprising.

 

This is something that I have just recently encountered with an LBH I am trying to get published. I have published several LBHs, but now, I have a cache in the hopper that is not being published. I gave coordinates for cachers to get to the cemetery's historical marker; then, I gave clues as to what they needed to find the final. The first time the reviewer disabled the listing asked if this was a multi-stage LBH. I replied that it was, even though I had submitted two different GPS coords, and now, I have the reviewer asking how does the historical marker get cachers to the final. In this cache's instance, the marker is the starting point, and doesn't direct cachers to the final. However, I think the reviewer is wanting a specific set of coords, not clues in the description. I am trying to figure out a way that combines the Letterboxing guidelines with the GC's guidelines. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

 

Link to comment

This translates to something like "for a Letterbox Hybrid to be accepted, significant GPS use has to be shown in the route to the cache. With this, we mean the following: a projection of a waypoint from a specified location, that is already defined by a coördinate. Or clear coördinates mentioned in the listing. ** The starting coördinates of the cache do not count for this. **

 

New rules? This doesn't help in getting a Letterbox accepted that is set up according to the fun, tried and tested "pictures with arrows" way . . .

 

That seems odd. There are clearly many LBH caches which are just a traditional with a stamp. Like a traditional, they just use the posted coordinates.

 

Following on from that, I've seen LBH caches which you need to go to the posted coordinates (that's GPS use), then follow clues.

 

To insist that the GPS is used in the "follow clues" part I find surprising.

 

This is something that I have just recently encountered with an LBH I am trying to get published. I have published several LBHs, but now, I have a cache in the hopper that is not being published. I gave coordinates for cachers to get to the cemetery's historical marker; then, I gave clues as to what they needed to find the final. The first time the reviewer disabled the listing asked if this was a multi-stage LBH. I replied that it was, even though I had submitted two different GPS coords, and now, I have the reviewer asking how does the historical marker get cachers to the final. In this cache's instance, the marker is the starting point, and doesn't direct cachers to the final. However, I think the reviewer is wanting a specific set of coords, not clues in the description. I am trying to figure out a way that combines the Letterboxing guidelines with the GC's guidelines. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

I had a similar problem but, in short, the guidelines say the cache must be at the posted coordinates, just like a traditional. I amended my listing and it was published.

Link to comment
I had a similar problem but, in short, the guidelines say the cache must be at the posted coordinates, just like a traditional. I amended my listing and it was published.
Oh, is that what "coordinates specific to the hide" means?

 

I would have assumed that it meant that the coordinates had to be somehow specifically related to finding the cache, and not general coordinates like a parking lot or a park entrance.

Link to comment
Oh, is that what "coordinates specific to the hide" means?

 

I would have assumed that it meant that the coordinates had to be somehow specifically related to finding the cache, and not general coordinates like a parking lot or a park entrance.

I assume the same, because that's exactly the way reviewers here in Germany handle LBHs. There must be at least one stage in the cache, which you search and find using accurate GPS coordinates. This excludes things like the parking lot, a trail head or a significant object (monument etc.). Apart from that, an LBH can be anything - a traditional (cache is at posted coordinates), puzzle (you have to solve it at home) or multi (more than one stage in the field). In the "multi" case, you are allowed to create a mix of stages, where some are to be found by coordinates, and others by letterbox-style clues.

Link to comment

However, I think the reviewer is wanting a specific set of coords, not clues in the description. I am trying to figure out a way that combines the Letterboxing guidelines with the GC's guidelines. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

 

Just like with a multi-cache, you list a waypoint that is hidden, so the reviewer can verify that the location is in an appropriate area and does not have any proximity issues.

Link to comment
Oh, is that what "coordinates specific to the hide" means?

 

I would have assumed that it meant that the coordinates had to be somehow specifically related to finding the cache, and not general coordinates like a parking lot or a park entrance.

I assume the same, because that's exactly the way reviewers here in Germany handle LBHs. There must be at least one stage in the cache, which you search and find using accurate GPS coordinates. This excludes things like the parking lot, a trail head or a significant object (monument etc.). Apart from that, an LBH can be anything - a traditional (cache is at posted coordinates), puzzle (you have to solve it at home) or multi (more than one stage in the field). In the "multi" case, you are allowed to create a mix of stages, where some are to be found by coordinates, and others by letterbox-style clues.

 

This is my understanding too. One needs to work with the reviewer to ensure they understand and agree that there is navigation based on coordinates as part of the cache.

 

There could be some "grey area" depending on exactly the coordinates take the finder to. For example:

 

1. Hide a physical stage (container) at coordinates. Inside the container there are letterbox style clues to take you to the final.

 

2. Coordinates take you to the Washington Monument. From there, the cache page gives you letterbox style clues to the final also using information on the monument. Nor do you need coordinates to find the cache.

 

3. Coordinates take you to a small and not well known "monument" in the woods. (E.g. a memorial to a pet). You use information on the "monument" combined with letterbox style clues to navigate to the final.

 

Case 1 I believe is clearly allowed. Case 2 not allowed, as you don't need to navigate to coordinates to find the monument.

 

Case 3 I think would be allowed as I've described it; but it becomes more grey area if the monument is little known, but information on it easily found online, and it's not in the woods. I.e. "significant object" is a judgement call by the reviewer.

 

And just like any other cache which is not hidden at the posted coordinates, there must be a waypoint with the coordinates of the final (as well as any physical stages).

Edited by redsox_mark
Link to comment

 

Case 3 I think would be allowed as I've described it; but it becomes more grey area if the monument is little known, but information on it easily found online, and it's not in the woods. I.e. "significant object" is a judgement call by the reviewer.

 

Yes, it is. The (in my eyes) absurd part of the story is however that there are no such rules for traditionals and there are tons of traditionals out there which are placed at significant objects and the description gives away exactly where to search and noone needs to use a GPS-receiver though of course the usage is possible.

 

In my eyes it is not consistent to require more with respect to GPS usage than for letterbox hybrids than for other cache types. It's a different story when no coordinates are involved at all as then also the example of a traditional at the very same location does not apply.

Link to comment

 

Case 3 I think would be allowed as I've described it; but it becomes more grey area if the monument is little known, but information on it easily found online, and it's not in the woods. I.e. "significant object" is a judgement call by the reviewer.

 

Yes, it is. The (in my eyes) absurd part of the story is however that there are no such rules for traditionals and there are tons of traditionals out there which are placed at significant objects and the description gives away exactly where to search and noone needs to use a GPS-receiver though of course the usage is possible.

 

In my eyes it is not consistent to require more with respect to GPS usage than for letterbox hybrids than for other cache types. It's a different story when no coordinates are involved at all as then also the example of a traditional at the very same location does not apply.

 

I don't see what the issue is. The coordinates for a traditional bring you to the hiding spot. If people use other features to find it, that's irrelevant.

 

Without the GPS rule for letterbox hybrids, people would hide letterboxes where GPS use is not only not required, but not useful at all.

 

There are lots of things in the game that aren't consistent if you insist on processing everything in such a severe way.

Link to comment

Without the GPS rule for letterbox hybrids, people would hide letterboxes where GPS use is not only not required, but not useful at all.

 

My point was that one could draw just as well the line between those where the GPS use is not useful and where it can be used (but need not).

 

Where is the difference between a traditional at the summit cross of mountain X and a letterbox hybrid which starts at the summit cross and then

one has to follow a description on how to proceed in terms of using the GPS to reach the summit cross? In both cases the cacher can choose whether or not

to use the GPS to go to the summit cross.

 

As letterbox hybrids require stamps and thus also larger containers, I do not see any danger that they would ever become that popular as

drive in traditionals with cheap micro containers hidden at boring locations which are easily found without GPS (so the sort of argument used against virtuals does not

work here).

 

It's a different story if someone sets up a mystery cache where no coordinates are provided at all and where the header coordinates are irrelevant bogus coordinates.

That's clearly a cache where the GPS is not useful.

 

 

 

There are lots of things in the game that aren't consistent if you insist on processing everything in such a severe way.

 

Yes, I agree. This does not make them consistent however.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

Without the GPS rule for letterbox hybrids, people would hide letterboxes where GPS use is not only not required, but not useful at all.

 

My point was that one could draw just as well the line between those where the GPS use is not useful and where it can be used (but need not).

 

Where is the difference between a traditional at the summit cross of mountain X and a letterbox hybrid which starts at the summit cross and then

one has to follow a description on how to proceed in terms of using the GPS to reach the summit cross? In both cases the cacher can choose whether or not

to use the GPS to go to the summit cross.

 

As letterbox hybrids require stamps and thus also larger containers, I do not see any danger that they would ever become that popular as

drive in traditionals with cheap micro containers hidden at boring locations which are easily found without GPS (so the sort of argument used against virtuals does not

work here).

 

It's a different story if someone sets up a mystery cache where no coordinates are provided at all and where the header coordinates are irrelevant bogus coordinates.

That's clearly a cache where the GPS is not useful.

 

 

 

There are lots of things in the game that aren't consistent if you insist on processing everything in such a severe way.

 

Yes, I agree. This does not make them consistent however.

 

I still fail to see how any of this is having a negative impact on the game.

Link to comment

 

My point was that one could draw just as well the line between those where the GPS use is not useful and where it can be used (but need not).

 

 

I see your point, but I also see why there is this guideline. Groundspeak doesn't want Letterbox Hybrid caches to be the same as Letterboxes. So they added a specific guideline.

 

Traditionals use coordinates. Sure, many can be found without using coordinates or a GPS.

Link to comment

As letterbox hybrids require stamps and thus also larger containers, I do not see any danger that they would ever become that popular as drive in traditionals with cheap micro containers hidden at boring locations which are easily found without GPS (so the sort of argument used against virtuals does not

work here).

 

Ah. I didn't realize that. My Letterbox Hybrid is a micro. Two MKHs. One with the stamp (that I carved out of an eraser.) The other with the log book. It is the most favorited LBH in New York State. 759 finds and 82 favorite hearts. It is in a beautiful place. The coords take you to a spot where you have to make observations, and follow the Letter Box clues to find the cache. It's been there nine years, so maybe the guidelines have changed. But the coords take you to a spot where you need to be to make the observations to follow the clues. Then again, the log today said the coords were 45 feet off! Oh, well. Follow the clues??? But it was my partner's favorite cache, so it lives on.

Link to comment

As letterbox hybrids require stamps and thus also larger containers, I do not see any danger that they would ever become that popular as drive in traditionals with cheap micro containers hidden at boring locations which are easily found without GPS (so the sort of argument used against virtuals does not

work here).

 

Ah. I didn't realize that. My Letterbox Hybrid is a micro. Two MKHs. One with the stamp (that I carved out of an eraser.) The other with the log book. It is the most favorited LBH in New York State. 759 finds and 82 favorite hearts. It is in a beautiful place. The coords take you to a spot where you have to make observations, and follow the Letter Box clues to find the cache. It's been there nine years, so maybe the guidelines have changed. But the coords take you to a spot where you need to be to make the observations to follow the clues. Then again, the log today said the coords were 45 feet off! Oh, well. Follow the clues??? But it was my partner's favorite cache, so it lives on.

Oh that is too cheeky. A letterbox hybrid micro; a stamp in a hide-a-key. I would give that a favorite just for the "what the heck, didn't expect that".

Edited by fbingha
Link to comment

As letterbox hybrids require stamps and thus also larger containers, I do not see any danger that they would ever become that popular as drive in traditionals with cheap micro containers hidden at boring locations which are easily found without GPS (so the sort of argument used against virtuals does not

work here).

 

Ah. I didn't realize that. My Letterbox Hybrid is a micro. Two MKHs. One with the stamp (that I carved out of an eraser.) The other with the log book. It is the most favorited LBH in New York State. 759 finds and 82 favorite hearts. It is in a beautiful place. The coords take you to a spot where you have to make observations, and follow the Letter Box clues to find the cache. It's been there nine years, so maybe the guidelines have changed. But the coords take you to a spot where you need to be to make the observations to follow the clues. Then again, the log today said the coords were 45 feet off! Oh, well. Follow the clues??? But it was my partner's favorite cache, so it lives on.

 

I found that one when I was in the city last year! We really enjoyed that one! Glad it's still alive and well.

Link to comment

This is a new one for me...

If someone can find info saying a punch is the same as a stamp in any letterboxing site, I'd like to see a link to it.

Thanks. :)

 

- But I agree, on this site, there's nothing saying a "punch" is a stamp replacement.

"The container for a Letterbox Hybrid must include a stamp, which stays with the geocache and may be used by letter-boxers to stamp their personal letter-boxing book. The cache can be logged without using the stamp."

Maybe a punch, like a sticker, or signing, can be an alternate method of logging, if that punch is unique enough to verify the find (if needed). :)

 

Because a happy face stamp from Michael's is so unique.

 

And that's why it's so ridiculous to have a separate LBH category, there's no point to it except as a way to get another icon.

 

No one cares about creating a unique stamp to identify the cache/letterbox. In true letterboxing fashion as it began in Dartmoor England, when stamps were introduced, they custom made their rubberstamps. Each was unique. That was the point, the unique stamps proved you found a particular box. I don't think Groundspeak understood the history and importance of a one-of-a-kind stamp when they introduced the category to try to persuade the letterboxers to join. Geocachers don't get it. The LBH cache type floundered and turned in to a puzzle/mystery cache for those who want another icon. Stickers, punches, dollar store stamps, or nothing, it doesn't really matter.

 

Unique custom-made Dartmoor letterbox stamps:

 

 

Lbox.gif

 

Amazing carves. Who's the artist?

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...
×
×
  • Create New...