Jump to content

A bit of a gripe.


Seth!
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

We've sworn off LC's because they are so badly policed by their own owners. We have 1 LC and it is higher maintainance than all our others. icon_mad.gif

The main thing is this, Take Kerry viewpoint Park for example.

We just happened to do it at night. We stood there, jaws open, drooling at the view those people have. icon_biggrin.gif We enjoyed it more than any cache we have found out in some stupid forest with bad sat signal.

As a cache its perfection. No pics required. Cant be plundered, thus robbing others the chance to go and see something rare unique and diffrent just because their micro was stolen or lost and then archived.

But not all VC's are within Seattle and the admins knowledge. Thus they are sceptical when they get a new cache thats a VC and they dont know about it.

There are a lot of things or places nearly as cool as Kerry Viewpoint park. But lately, if they dont know about it, they axe it.

 

I think LC's should go bye-bye to a new site, but dont rob me of the chance to experience things like Kerry Viewpoint because there is no good place to put a cache!

 

icon_geocachingwa.gif

 

Cachin's a bit sweeter when you've got an Isha!

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Ish-n-Isha:

I think LC's should go bye-bye to a new site, but dont rob me of the chance to experience things like Kerry Viewpoint because there is no good place to put a cache!


 

but the first thing that poped into my head when I read this was "I bet I could find a place to put a cache there!" icon_biggrin.gif

Link to comment

Niskibum and others probably COULD hide one there, especially with the new macro tubes BUT, the point of lost or stolen caches comes into play then as well! Also the cache planter himself doesnt really know if all the no finds are from the hard hide or if the cache is actually gone!

When using Kerry Viewpoint as the example, we concieve of the actual cache hunt as (1)the time it takes to get there,(2) the time it takes to find it, (3) if you can find it, (4) the time you have left over to enjoy why your there AFTER you spend untold hours scouring the place with a toothbrush.

The point of ANY CACHE is, the reason a cache is there in the first place!

In Kerry Viewpoint the point would be the view. The time that is taken away from the view would then be used instead to crawl around on your hands and knees looking in cracks under the sculpture. Not the best and highest purpose for THIS PARTICULAR cache site.

Other caches have the theme of the "tough find" where the idea is, There is NO view and its all about the great hide.

Also the VC provides instant verification of a find that a log book never will.

icon_geocachingwa.gif

 

Cachin's a bit sweeter when you've got an Isha!

 

[This message was edited by Ish-n-Isha on December 27, 2002 at 04:09 PM.]

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by vds:

What if the web site treated locationless/virtual caches as a separate class of items (ala benchmarks), with separate counters and searches on the web site ?


 

quote:
Originally posted by Seth!:

You can expect that to happen. It has been discussed quite a bit and, at least for LCs, is inevitable.


 

This is good to hear. These come as close to something like geotravel.com, if there ever was one. It may be fun for some folks to see pictures of all the barbershop poles around the world, but it is too far removed from what finding a geocache is all about. You are not using your GPS to locate anything. Only recording a position. Plus only one person usually is allowed to log that location, so it excludes many people. I like the idea of having separate find counts for the different cache types. It still gives everyone a way to show their accomplishments.

 

19973_600.gifThe adventures of Navdog, Justdog, and Otterpup

Link to comment

Absolutely well said DiscoJason,

 

I agree 100%. I think we are missing a bigger point here. We all have different tastes.. we all have different favorite caches. You may like a cache or hate a cache, but it seems to me that the ones that yelp the loudest about cache pollution or cheesiness.. are right out there FINDING those same caches they complain about. As far as locationless and virtual caches, we have really enjoyed the ones we have done. If you choose not to do them, that is your right. But to me it is damaging to the sport to wield an "elitist" attitude about it.. if you choose not to hunt them... don't hunt them... I don't care what you do. We all have different likes/dislikes. For us, many virtuals and locationlesses have been quite enjoyable because we end up in interesting spots.. places where there is more to offer than just the statue or plaque. For me.. geocaching is more than just finding a box full of trinkets.. it is about visiting a spot and learning about it. Many of these virtuals are set in areas where there are also excellent photo taking opportunities. My photography skills have improved because of geocaching and the places we have been able to visit.

 

I just get tired of the "elitist" attitude I hear so much among geocachers. If you don't like a particular cache or type of cache.., please.. by all means email the cache owner or geocaching.com to complain.

 

These broad stereotypes just don't cut it with me. To tell someone that if they do virtuals or locationless caches, they are not "contributing" to the sport... well it is just petty and immature in my opinion. They may not contribute to YOUR enjoyment of the sport.. but each cacher is different.. each cache is different.

Get over yourself...

 

What is most enjoyable to you, may not be to others. I feel that many cachers fancy themselves and their own caches so much.. they become caching "snobs" and begin to 'dis others to try to bolster their own caches or ideas. They may think many caches are BENEATH them. That is fine.. don't search for them. Thanks DiscoJason for saying so eloquently what I just garbled up~!

 

Time for a vacation. I feel that holiday edge. Too much driving, not enough caching. Virtual, locationless.. regular cache.. I don't care.. I just need to go CACHING! icon_eek.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Ish-n-Isha:

Niskibum and others probably COULD hide one there, especially with the new macro tubes BUT, the point of lost or stolen caches comes into play then as well! Also the cache planter himself doesnt really know if all the no finds are from the hard hide or if the cache is actually gone!

When using Kerry Viewpoint as the example, we concieve of the actual cache hunt as (1)the time it takes to get there,(2) the time it takes to find it, (3) if you can find it, (4) the time you have left over to enjoy why your there AFTER you spend untold hours scouring the place with a toothbrush.

 

[This message was edited by Ish-n-Isha on December 27, 2002 at 04:09 PM.]


 

I disagree.

 

In a series of caches I've hidden the locations you visit form a narrative line (following a stream as it grows from a little seep all the way to a major stream and empties into a river).

The caches are Bear Creek A, Bear Creek B, Bear Creek C, and Bear Creek Final.

 

Some of the hides are fairly clever.

 

The 'point' might be either the hides, or it might be the series of locations. But it doesn't have to be one, or the other. By using progressive hints, I've made it possible for people to scale the challenge to suit themselves. If you want a hard series - find all the caches without using the hints. If you find that's taking away from your enjoyment of the series of locations, by all means use the hints. If you use the spoilers, I expect that it's about as difficult as Kerry Viewpoint, except for solving the puzzle to get the final cache.

 

But with Kerry Viewpoint, if you want a challenge, there really aren't any options, are there?

 

icon_geocachingwa.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Navdog:

quote:
Originally posted by vds:

What if the web site treated locationless/virtual caches as a separate class of items (ala benchmarks), with separate counters and searches on the web site ?


quote:
Originally posted by Seth!:

You can expect that to happen. It has been discussed quite a bit and, at least for LCs, is inevitable.


This is good to hear. These come as close to something like geotravel.com, if there ever was one. It may be fun for some folks to see pictures of all the barbershop poles around the world, but it is too far removed from what finding a geocache is all about. You are not using your GPS to locate anything. Only recording a position. Plus only one person usually is allowed to log that location, so it excludes many people. I like the idea of having separate find counts for the different cache types. It still gives everyone a way to show their accomplishments.


Why bother? It assumes that certain kinds of caches have more “value” than others when, in fact, they have no worth other than what individuals assign to them. Also, the number of finds is just one--and probably not the first--of many motivations for geocaching.

 

Categorization would create a dilemma of how to count caches that don't neatly fall into a niche. Some micros don't have a log, while a special cache may require you to find something that's neither a container nor a fixed object. Some multi-stage caches include traditional, virtual and reverse (my preferred name for locationless) caches! Unless the approval process gets significantly more restrictive and consistent then it's pointless to even consider breaking out finds by cache type.

 

This is a rapidly evolving sport that is barely 2 years old, so it's premature to be getting too fussy what is and isn't a cache. There are some basic quality, ethical and legal considerations handled by the current guidelines but beyond that it's dealer's choice. To which I say, "Great!" I believe two primary purposes of geocaching are to expand use of the GPS and to help people learn more about the world around them. Creative caches do this, not an emphasis on the number of finds or the type of cache. Some of your caches are a good example of one approach.

 

Let's encourage people to create quality caches of whatever type they want to do. Personally, I like reverse caches and find them to be a pleasant break from the boring traditional caches that seem to be everywhere. I typically spend 2 to 3 times the effort logging a reverse cache compared to a standard cache, and I often come away knowing more than when I started. Reverse caches are insignificant in their numbers (less than 400 total) but I would hate to see them disappear or be relegated to a separate area.

Link to comment

Those who can do, or otherwise;

Those who cannot, forum.

 

Sorry, but to each his own. If geocaching dot com thought 'virtuals' were a 'waste' then Admins wouldn't be approving them then. I, too, agree to each his own. Seek and ye shall find .... whether a physical walk or in your mind.

 

Peace.

 

CameraThyme

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by bigeddy:

Reverse caches are insignificant in their numbers (less than 400 total) but I would hate to see them disappear or be relegated to a separate area.


 

I live in the middle of a very high density area for geocaches. The 400 closest traditional caches to my home lie less than 35 miles from my house.

 

Now, that's amazingly high density. But of the caches that I can do without driving more than, say, 40 miles to the cache, 50% of them are locationless.

 

I'd hardly call that an insignificant number.

 

For someone who lives in an area where caches are spread more sparsely, the 400th traditional cache is going to be hundreds of miles away. And that means that, of the caches they can seek without hours and hours of driving, the VAST MAJORITY will be locationless. I just wish all the effort that went into typing up all the 'christmas lights' locationless caches that were rejected this past holiday season (and I've heard there were lots and lots submitted) had been put into hiding traditional caches in those sparse areas.

 

icon_geocachingwa.gif

Link to comment

We have about nine caches to our name. The kids like the goodies, I like a more cerebral approach. I would much rather find a clever answer than a dollar store trinket or something similar ("Where do you keep your animals?" On You, Me and Wapiti was a great laugh and not obvious...)

 

Heck, with my caches I will be emailing custom first finder's certificates for folks with their name and the cachename and coords on it (see a small sample here: http://home.earthlink.net/~piscator/smallgeocert.jpg ) I guess that's a virtual certificate... So hurl flames if you like, but as a new cacher, I like the virtuals.

 

-Gus

The Strand Family

http://home.earthlink.net/~piscator

Link to comment

Gus, explain how a virtual is cerebral.

 

I would have to say a virtual is very much an emotional experience. Not intellectual at all. Your there to experience a location that the hider wants to share with others. Sharing moments is an emotional exchange. Pleasing the Limbic system is not cerebral.confused3.gif

 

geomark8.gif

If you do not extend your expectations unto others, you will not be disappointed by the stupid things they do.

Mokita!

Link to comment

I've scanned the thread and want to add my opinion. I too, like the thrill of finding the container that some one has placed. Reading and signing the log seems important in connecting with the cache, even if I do not exchange trinkets.

 

I prefer the more difficult or interesting or unique caches. I jumped on the Contact Cache and worked on it until I solved and located it. I've still got the props I used in the solution displayed in my house.

 

I quit geocaching actively last spring because I became bored with the easy, "go right to it" caches. I've looked to do caches that are in an interesting place or have a uniqueness about them. Check out the "Adrenaline Cache" or the "Shoeless Joe Cache" for some examples.

 

I placed a cache last spring, but have been somewhat disappointed that few of the strong geocachers in the area have solved it. I made it more difficult, rather than less difficult, and put it in a great location. I was inspired by some of the better caches that I have hunted. Most of those geocachers who have found my cache have commented favorably on it. I agree that the more difficult caches are the least often located. Non-the-less, those are the ones that I prefer to seek.

 

I will place another cache, but only when I can create a good caching experience for the seekers.

I hope other geocachers will continue to place quality well thoughtout caches.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Rick

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 0
×
×
  • Create New...