You have too many caches when...

[+Team Microdot]

I see this sort of thing with increasing regularity:

Cacher X: Found cache log book was wet tftc

Cache owner: Hi its been a long wet winter and these caches haven't been found for a long time. If the logbook is wet, it's not my fault and if the comments continue, I will archive the series.

One of the reasons I no longer tell people about geocaching. It's embarassing.

[+Mausebiber]

26 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

If the logbook is wet, it's not my fault and if the comments continue, I will archive the series.

" It's embarassing " , I agree, very sad.

We all should log notes stating that the logbook is wet.  Maybe, soon we will have one useless owner less.

[garyo1954]

35 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

I see this sort of thing with increasing regularity:

Cacher X: Found cache log book was wet tftc

Cache owner: Hi its been a long wet winter and these caches haven't been found for a long time. If the logbook is wet, it's not my fault and if the comments continue, I will archive the series.

One of the reasons I no longer tell people about geocaching. It's embarassing.

I was thinking any response was better than no response, but you proved that theory wrong.

I've logged several after heavy rain that were in excellent condition. Even with rain on Friday and rain/sprinkling and mist most of yesterday, I logged two this morning that were flawless. 
 

Edited April 8, 2018 by garyo1954

[+cerberus1]

We see a cacher say "Replaced wet log with a strip of paper.  Thanks for placing and maintaining hides for us to find!"  or similar.   That "strip of paper" came from one of the sheets they tore out of a notepad from a cache earlier, or anything but  a log meant for a hide.

We rarely hear from cos on those hides.  It'd be nice if they would respond like that.   I rarely hit those kinda hides, but  might help him on his way.  

[+PlantAKiss]

You have too many caches when...you can’t maintain them. Strings of comments on wet logbooks, water in caches, logbooks full, NM logs, broken containers...  I see that a lot. I use the NM logs but people seem reluctant to do that. 

[+Team Microdot]

25 minutes ago, PlantAKiss said:

You have too many caches when...you can’t maintain them. Strings of comments on wet logbooks, water in caches, logbooks full, NM logs, broken containers...  I see that a lot. I use the NM logs but people seem reluctant to do that. 

Small wonder they are reluctant when the response is rudeness, abuse and threats.

Of course, that's exactly what the CO is hoping will happen.

Edited April 8, 2018 by Team Microdot
Typo

[+The Magna Defender]

How about you stop watching other people's caches. 

Edited April 8, 2018 by The Magna Defender
Changed

[+Team Microdot]

8 minutes ago, The Magna Defender said:

You have too much free time when you're going through logs that aren't on caches you own, plan to find, have found or are even in your local area. 

 

Get a life! 

I already have a life thank you.

And not that it makes the slightest difference but just for the sake of flirting with the facts, I have found the cache in question and it's not the only one with this sort of CO abuse.

[+Team Microdot]

20 minutes ago, The Magna Defender said:

How about you stop watching other people's caches. 

The feature exists for that express purpose - why wouldn't I use it?

[+L0ne.R]

21 minutes ago, The Magna Defender said:

How about you stop watching other people's caches. 

Please don't.

It takes a community, one that prides itself in the quality of caches in that community, and in the integrity of this recreational pastime. 

[+The Magna Defender]

4 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

The feature exists for that express purpose - why wouldn't I use it?

Do other cache owners get this level of scrutiny from you regarding their caches? There are over 2 million cachers in the world. The fact you are stalking just one constitutes harassment. 

[+Team Microdot]

Just now, The Magna Defender said:

Do other cache owners get this level of scrutiny from you regarding their caches? There are over 2 million cachers in the world. The fact you are stalking just one constitutes harassment. 

I'm not stalking or harassing anyone, merely commenting on an undesirable facet of geocaching that can and does spoil people's enjoyment while showing the game in a negative light that contributes to the embarassment that's led to me no longer advertising my involvement in the game.

Even people I've never previously met or corresponded with have contacted me and shared their similar experiences.

[+colleda]

Watching a cache is hardly "stalking". We watch caches all the time for variuos reasons, none of which have anything to do with anyone else as to why. And I don't give a toss about who may be watching mine.

[+The Magna Defender]

5 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

I'm not stalking or harassing anyone, merely commenting on an undesirable facet of geocaching that can and does spoil people's enjoyment while showing the game in a negative light that contributes to the embarassment that's led to me no longer advertising my involvement in the game.

Even people I've never previously met or corresponded with have contacted me and shared their similar experiences.

Please answer the question. Do other cache owners receive this same level of scrutiny on their caches or do you just stalk mine? You've done well today with your stalking bearing in mind the earlier site outage. 

[+Team Microdot]

1 minute ago, The Magna Defender said:

Please answer the question. Do other cache owners receive this same level of scrutiny on their caches or do you just stalk mine? You've done well today with your stalking bearing in mind the earlier site outage. 

I've already answered your question fully and clearly - as quoted by you above.

[+The Magna Defender]

6 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

I've already answered your question fully and clearly - as quoted by you above.

Sorry no you haven't. Is it just me you are stalking,  or do you watch daily logs of every single cache in the world and then comment about them on this forum?

I don't see other cache owners berated on here like the harassment I have to endure. 

[+Team Microdot]

5 minutes ago, The Magna Defender said:

Sorry no you haven't. Is it just me you are stalking,  or do you watch daily logs of every single cache in the world and then comment about them on this forum?

I don't see other cache owners berated on here like the harassment I have to endure. 

I'm not stalking or harassing anyone, merely commenting on an undesirable facet of geocaching that can and does spoil people's enjoyment while showing the game in a negative light that contributes to the embarassment that's led to me no longer advertising my involvement in the game.

[garyo1954]

2 minutes ago, The Magna Defender said:

Sorry no you haven't. Is it just me you are stalking,  or do you watch daily logs of every single cache in the world and then comment about them on this forum?

I don't see other cache owners berated on here like the harassment I have to endure. 

How would anybody know who the unnamed party was if you hadn't told us? Isn't that like self harassing/self stalking/paranoia/flagellation?


 

[+L0ne.R]

1 hour ago, garyo1954 said:

How would anybody know who the unnamed party was if you hadn't told us? Isn't that like self harassing/self stalking/paranoia/flagellation?
 

2

 

I thought the original post might be referring to another owner, someone with a lot of church micros, (not TMD) who said something similar. Perhaps it's a common threat by power trail style owners--I'm guessing TMD must have posted the threat to archive too, and so believes the op refers to him. 

Edited April 9, 2018 by L0ne.R
comma

[+Team Microdot]

2 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

I thought the original post might be referring to another owner, someone with a lot of church micros, (not TMD) who said something similar. Perhaps it's a common threat by power trail style owners--I'm guessing TMD must have posted the threat to archive too and so believes the op refers to him. 

IMO abuse and threats of this nature by any CO are not only injurious to the game as a whole but also leave a nasty taste in the mouth and make us all look bad.

[+K13]

4 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

I see this sort of thing with increasing regularity:

Cacher X: Found cache log book was wet tftc

Cache owner: Hi its been a long wet winter and these caches haven't been found for a long time. If the logbook is wet, it's not my fault and if the comments continue, I will archive the series.

One of the reasons I no longer tell people about geocaching. It's embarassing.

A Cache Owner who posts a comment like that should be reported to HQ. The CO, by his own admission, has stated that he has no intention of maintaining his caches and will archive them instead of performing maintenance.

Those are the type of cache owners the hobby would be better without.

[+The Magna Defender]

24 minutes ago, K13 said:

A Cache Owner who posts a comment like that should be reported to HQ. The CO, by his own admission, has stated that he has no intention of maintaining his caches and will archive them instead of performing maintenance.

Those are the type of cache owners the hobby would be better without.

[Text removed by moderator] This particular series has only been out a year, it got a flurry of finders when it was new and now its been sat there without finds for about 8 months. Of course the caches will be inevitably wet. This one guy was the first to turn up in ages. I never said I wouldn't maintain it, I said I would archive them if the situation continues. How am I supposed to know what state a cache is in if it hasn't been visited for 8 months??

 

The problem I have is that most cachers nowadays are so fixated on the state of the cache, they never ever say anything about the walk they've done, the wildlife theyve seen or the gorgeous views. They are just so fixated on the scrawl of dingy paper they write nothing else on their online log. As a CO I want to hear about their experiences and frankly that's gone out the window in recent years. 

Edited April 9, 2018 by Keystone
Added

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, The Magna Defender said:

This particular series has only been out a year, it got a flurry of finders when it was new and now its been sat there without finds for about 8 months. Of course the caches will be inevitably wet.

Inevitably? After just 8 months? On Saturday I found a cache that's been out there since 2009, the container and logbook still bone dry and pretty much in pristine condition in spite of GZ being in a pocket of subtropical rainforest. Sure, this wasn't the original cache hidden in 2004, that was replaced by the CO in 2009 after the original was muggled, but even so it shows that with a little care in choice of container and cache placement, soggy logs certainly aren't inevitable.

 

[+grimpil]

>>>The problem I have is that most cachers nowadays are so fixated on the state of the cache, they never ever say anything about the walk they've done, the wildlife theyve seen or the gorgeous views. They are just so fixated on the scrawl of dingy paper they write nothing else on their online log. As a CO I want to hear about their experiences and frankly that's gone out the window in recent years<<<

As I am pretty new to this hobby I have been reading all sorts of topics on the forum to up my knowledge of this interesting new take on the world around me.  Maybe it is beginner enthusiasm but I am trying to write the sort of logs I would hope to find if I was a CO.  But indeed there are loads that say little beyond "found it" or TFTC.  I enjoy reading more descriptive logs of the caches I have found - makes it more fun.

But after 2 months hanging around here I see there is a large slant towards collecting numbers, in the same way some collect so called friends on FB.  I don't care if I only find 3 or 4 of the 20 caches which might be in a specific area - for me it is all about adding value to my main interest of getting out & about hiking.  It is gratifying to see people on here caching as families - getting even quite small children interested in a hobby which is far better for their physical & mental health than sitting indoors glued to virtual world.  But well written logs would fill the caching world with more community spirit & shared enjoyment & surely more satisfactory feedback for COs.  Perhaps better feedback would result in COs feeling their work was worthwhile instead of feeling "ho hum, 6 people found my cache this week - 6 notches on their bedposts, but only one bothered to make me feel they were actually there at GZ".

On a slightly sad note I have yet to discover any swag worth doing a swap for - most is either inappropriate for my advancing years or is just mouldy wet tat.  No point me leaving some decent little trinket if that is how it will end up.  But my motivation never was aquiring stuff so it matters little to me, but again I feel this reflects the "let's up our log count & move on to the next site" atmosphere that pervades.

[+mimaef]

A well maintained cache with a bit more care into the container will not be inevitably wet. In my area there are quite a few that will sit for long periods over harsh winters and don't have that issue. If the cache isn't maintained, is moldy or constantly soggy (sometimes both), it might as well just be considered trash in the forest and that goes against many of the principles of geocaching. You want to hear about the wildlife and beautiful views they've seen, but don't care about what your container is doing to affect the environment around it that creates these memories? I care about the container because I are about the environment in which its placed, but maybe that's just me.

[+fizzymagic]

5 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Inevitably? After just 8 months? On Saturday I found a cache that's been out there since 2009, the container and logbook still bone dry and pretty much in pristine condition in spite of GZ being in a pocket of subtropical rainforest.

I live in a somewhat drier climate, but I've found (and own) several caches in my area with original logbooks dating from 2002.  They all have one thing in common: they are all ammo cans.

Just a couple of weeks ago I found an ammo can that had not been visited for almost 5 years.  It had become buried in mud in a crevice between rocks over the intervening rainy seasons. We dug it out to find it bone-dry inside and in perfect condition.

Well-maintained is all well and good, but choosing a good container to start with is the biggest factor. Second-biggest factor is log material.  Regular maintenance, in my experience, comes in a distant third.

My recommendations: 

• for a regular-sized cache, use an ammo can.
• for a small cache, use a high-end locking plastic and hide the cache out of the sun.
• for small and micro caches, use waterproof (not just water-resistant) paper for the log.
• for a micro cache, use a bison of some size and don't expect the O-ring to last. Match tubes are also OK.  Pill bottles, Altoids tins, cheap plastic food containers, lip balm tubes, shampoo bottles, and film canisters do not work.

If cache hiders followed these recommendations maintenance would be much less an issue.

Edited April 9, 2018 by fizzymagic

[+barefootjeff]

The rainforest example I showed was a Sistema Klip It, available in supermarkets here for a few dollars so unlikely to be stolen by cachers. They last quite well outdoors, particularly if not exposed to direct sunlight which can make the plastic go brittle and crack after a few years. My oldest active cache, hidden in January 2014, uses one of those and is still in great shape with everything inside remaining bone dry.

[+LFC4eva]

12 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

The rainforest example I showed was a Sistema Klip It, available in supermarkets here for a few dollars so unlikely to be stolen by cachers. They last quite well outdoors, particularly if not exposed to direct sunlight which can make the plastic go brittle and crack after a few years. My oldest active cache, hidden in January 2014, uses one of those and is still in great shape with everything inside remaining bone dry.

I found one of those last week, after one of the wettest years here in the UK.. it had been placed in July 2007 - https://coord.info/GLVAPC9M  and it was still the original container, with the original logbook and it was in immaculate condition.  

 

There is no such thing as bad weather.. just inappropriate cache containers. 

[+grimpil]

>>>There is no such thing as bad weather.. just inappropriate cache containers. <<<

A new take on "wrong clothing" - nice one!!

Yes - does not get much damper than NW England!

 

[+lee737]

1 hour ago, fizzymagic said:

I live in a somewhat drier climate, but I've found (and own) several caches in my area with original logbooks dating from 2002.  They all have one thing in common: they are all ammo cans.

Just a couple of weeks ago I found an ammo can that had not been visited for almost 5 years.  It had become buried in mud in a crevice between rocks over the intervening rainy seasons. We dug it out to find it bone-dry inside and in perfect condition.

Ammo cans really do fulfil their purpose, don't they. In saying that though, I pulled a cache up out of the mud of a lake a few weeks back, a lock'n'lock in a crab net, weighted down with diving weights. It was *reasonably* dry inside. So I dispute the myth that all caches will get wet.....

[+mimaef]

34 minutes ago, The Magna Defender said:

I tried using expensive containers once but someone kept nicking them. Why should I spend a fortune for some old fool dog walker to come along and nick them? 

I've seen some pretty creative methods for keeping a cache where it belongs (everything from heavy chain locks to wire, one even changed the theme of their cache to reflect the new security). For my letterboxes you bet I'm going to make that stamp as hard as possible to remove from the containers I'm currently building - letterbox hybrid stamps disappear faster than a geocoin. Apparently people really like stamps. So, there's always that type of option to think about if you want to put out more quality containers again. Generally thieves like an easy mark, not effort.

After chatting with some of the locals and finding some stunningly well maintained micros, I've figured out soda preforms are a cheaper container (I can get 30 for about 20 USD) that seem to work really well based on the placement and no one wants to run off with them. I'm not sure what containers in particular you're having problems with though.

Edited April 9, 2018 by mimaef
clarity

[+L0ne.R]

59 minutes ago, The Magna Defender said:

expensive containers

They don't have to be expensive. You can get quality authentic Lock&Locks in bulk - 4 for £6.67 FREE UK delivery

And they're palm-size which makes them easier to hide but big enough for geocoins, small trackables and trade items. Quality container, not expensive and fun for everyone - those who don't care about content and those who do. 

[+Clongo_Rongo]

14 hours ago, The Magna Defender said:

How about you stop watching other people's caches. 

This may be due to only having a few caches active and is researching to see what can be learnt from experienced placers

 

 

Edited April 9, 2018 by CHEZRASCALS

[+Clongo_Rongo]

1 hour ago, The Magna Defender said:

I tried using expensive containers once but someone kept nicking them. Why should I spend a fortune for some old fool dog walker to come along and nick them? 

As on other forum posts, the issue is that new people are expecting a large dry log book at base of a tree.

what also does not help, some more experienced finders think this also is how it should be.

Going out to find a cache and looking for negative comments to make must be boring and disappointed when no faults are found.

[+coachstahly]

13 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

12 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

IMO abuse and threats of this nature by any CO are not only injurious to the game as a whole but also leave a nasty taste in the mouth and make us all look bad.

And not that it makes the slightest difference but just for the sake of flirting with the facts, I have found the cache in question and it's not the only one with this sort of CO abuse.

14 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

Small wonder they are reluctant when the response is rudeness, abuse and threats.

 

 

15 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

Cache owner: Hi its been a long wet winter and these caches haven't been found for a long time. If the logbook is wet, it's not my fault and if the comments continue, I will archive the series.

I fail to see how this particular comment by the CO is abusive, overly rude, or threatening to anyone or anything but the comments that might lead to archival.  Abuse is a big stretch, at least to me.  Rudeness?  Perhaps, but nothing overly offensive and nothing that really pushes it over the bounds of civility.  Threats?  To archive the series, yes, but so what?  It's not directed at you but at the cache series and the continued wet log comments that might lead up to possible archival.  So what if this cacher opts to archive all the caches if the comments continue?  Let them.  If I find a wet or damp log, you can bet I'm going to make a comment about it in my log.  If it's bad enough, I'll even file a NM log.  That was the experience I had with that particular cache, so I'm going to relate it, regardless of what the CO might do.

Embarrassing?  Perhaps.  Personally, I rarely talk about the caches that aren't very good with those who don't cache.  I make sure to point out the neat ones to highlight the reasons why I still cache - Barney Smith's Toilet Seat Museum, the EC and virtual at the Cologne cathedral, a multi in rural Indiana, a 5 mile roundtrip hike for a single cache in an area that was devastated by a tornado but is thriving again, the Lego giraffe in Berlin, a multi along the limestone cliffs of the Ohio river, a letterbox hybrid that takes you on an underground trip through downtown Chicago, the rather routine cache that gave me a story I'll remember the rest of my life, the puzzle that looks unsolvable but you get that "AHA" moment and realize you can solve it.  Why would I mention the caches that are boring or mundane, or downright disgusting because they're a wet, pulpy mess?  That does NOT mean that those types of caches aren't out there; I just choose to mention that yes, not all things are pristine and there are some caches that many will find unappealing.  You have to be willing to suffer some of the not so good caches in the hope that one of those you didn't have high hopes for turns out to be a nice experience, for whatever reason that might be.

You and Lone.R seem to focus mostly on all things negative about caching and only occasionally comment or post about those that are positive with regard to this activity.  I don't know either of you, don't know your situations, and don't know what your home area is like with regard to caching in general.  It just seems like there's nothing positive going on in your caching community and it's all bad and causing both of you to be so negative about things that it makes me wonder why both of you are still active cachers (or at least still active on this forum).  I realize that the forums are a place to discuss all aspects of geocaching and that not everything is in great shape with this activity that we have chosen to participate in.  I just choose to make my life less stressful and focus more on the good things than the bad things we encounter while geocaching.  If I ever get to the point where I'm the curmudgeonly old man complaining about everything bad, then it will be time for me to find a new activity to participate in.

I don't completely disagree with the premise of your post.  It's just a little rude (but I would take no offense if it was in response to my log) and the threat is to archive the caches.  Perhaps this CO should archive the series if they're that bothered by the comments about the experience a cacher had with one of their caches.  As a CO, you have to take the good with the bad, when it comes to cachers relating the experience they had with one of your caches.

[+LFC4eva]

7 minutes ago, CHEZRASCALS said:

This may be due to only having a few caches active and is researching to see what can be learnt from experience placers

 

 

Quality over quantity any day of the week for me... it's much better to put out a few quality, waterproof containers than a stack of piddly micros - especially if you have a superiority complex and get upset every time someone mentions a wet log.

Quality containers don't have to cost the earth and anything less is false economy - IMHO of course.

[+L0ne.R]

27 minutes ago, coachstahly said:

You and Lone.R seem to focus mostly on all things negative about caching and only occasionally comment or post about those that are positive with regard to this activity.

In my defense, on this page I posted 2 positive comments, to encourage an increase in the quality of the pastime:

 

14 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

It takes a community, one that prides itself in the quality of caches in that community, and in the integrity of this recreational pastime. 

 

1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

They don't have to be expensive. You can get quality authentic Lock&Locks in bulk - 4 for £6.67 FREE UK delivery

And they're palm-size which makes them easier to hide but big enough for geocoins, small trackables and trade items. Quality container, not expensive and fun for everyone - those who don't care about content and those who do. 

 

[+coachstahly]

1 minute ago, L0ne.R said:

In my defense, on this page I posted 2 positive comments, to encourage an increase in the quality of the pastime:

But those aren't positive examples of things you've actually encountered, those are about things you WANT.  You've given an example of what a positive community should look like but I honestly can't remember you praising such a place in your visits.  You want to travel and involve caching in your travels but find that it's usually a waste of your time because they're not maintained the way you want them.

Again (with lock-n-locks), that's great, but you've stated repeatedly that you wish more cachers used authentic lock-n-locks (your idea about what makes for a good cache container) and only rarely do you find them, being certain to give them FPs when that happens, which, according to you, is happening less and less.  Very rarely do I see you post about those real life positive experiences.  Without going back and looking at all of your posts, most of the positive comments are about what you want caching to be like and what it used to be like (or in our reminiscing, what we thought it used to be like), while a large majority of your negative posts are about what you actually encounter.

Those are 2 positive things you WANT to happen (and I'd agree with those sentiments), but you rarely post positive real world examples from your caching adventures.  You mostly get on here and complain about how hard it is to filter out the types of cachers and caches you want to avoid, the messy caches you find when you normally cache, the mis-labeling of sizes, the dearth of maintenance by COs, the PT mentality that mandates a find and copy and paste logging, and how hard it is to find caches you enjoy on a regular basis.  I have NO problem with ANY of those complaints and agree with you on most of them.

Here's where we differ (at least I think that's the case).  I don't let those things get me upset about this activity we have chosen to make part of our lives.  I've encountered every single one of the issues you've raised but I still find enjoyment in finding caches.  I cache less now than I did when I first started, but that's more because my caching style has changed.  When I go to new areas (or visit ones I haven't cached in frequently), I always have more caches loaded than I have time to do.  I'm disappointed by some of them, find most of them average but still OK, and a few really impress me.  It's those few that I get excited about and keep me caching, even with a large majority of them being average or disappointing.

I realize this is off topic but in a way it's somewhat related.  Each of us has our expectations about caching, either as a finder or as a CO, or in many cases, both.  If a CO is going to get upset about comments regarding a wet log, then perhaps they shouldn't be a CO.  Go ahead and bypass the threats to archive the series and just do it.  If a cacher is going to get upset because 75% of the caches they find aren't meeting their expectations, and that's what they choose to focus on (rather than the other 25%) then perhaps they shouldn't be a cacher. This activity is what each individual makes it to be, not what others make it out to be.  There are some guidelines we all have to abide by, but by and large, it's up to the individual to determine how much enjoyment they can get out of all the different aspects this activity has to offer.

 

[+L0ne.R]

44 minutes ago, coachstahly said:

If a cacher is going to get upset because 75% of the caches they find aren't meeting their expectations, and that's what they choose to focus on (rather than the other 25%) then perhaps they shouldn't be a cacher.

I'm not ready to throw in the towel. I am not willing to accept that unless I'm OK with 75% geolitter, I "shouldn't be a cacher". I'm pessimistic about the current state, but optimistic that it could be fun for both quality and quantity seekers, and that Groundspeak has the means and skill to make it happen. 

[+coachstahly]

1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

I'm not ready to throw in the towel. I am not willing to accept that unless I'm OK with 75% geolitter, I "shouldn't be a cacher". I'm pessimistic about the current state, but optimistic that it could be fun for both quality and quantity seekers, and that Groundspeak has the means and skill to make it happen. 

I didn't say that the 75% (and I have no idea how I arrived at that particular percentage) was all entirely geo-litter.  What I said is that the 75% falls in the range from mundane caches down to geo-litter.  If I'm being honest with myself, it's probably more like 90-95% of the caches I find are in that range and the 10-5% are the ones that I really enjoy.  Those mundane caches might include LPCs, micro caches in the woods, smalls that have damp logs but aren't wet inside (other than the log), caches in the woods along a cache populated hiking trail that don't have much ingenuity, creativity, or reason beyond just being there, the LBH at the posted coordinates instead of using letterbox directions (or not having a stamp), a regular cache with no swag or swag that's just not that good, a bridge hide that mimics a well-liked cache but isn't done nearly as well, a multi that started out with a promising idea but resorts to standard styles of hides seen countless times before, a virtual that is liked only because it's old and it's a rarer type, a Wherigo that makes you walk around a baseball field in order to score a run and be able to find the final, etc....

There's nothing wrong with those types of caches; however, they're just.....there.  They're not geo-litter but they don't accrue lots of FPs because they're really not that interesting.  I have no problem finding those types of caches.  They just don't get me excited about caching like the 5-10% I DO find that I really enjoy for whatever reason that might be.

[+L0ne.R]

1 minute ago, coachstahly said:

I didn't say that the 75% (and I have no idea how I arrived at that particular percentage) was all entirely geo-litter.  What I said is that the 75% falls in the range from mundane caches down to geo-litter.  If I'm being honest with myself, it's probably more like 90-95% of the caches I find are in that range and the 10-5% are the ones that I really enjoy.  Those mundane caches might include LPCs, micro caches in the woods, smalls that have damp logs but aren't wet inside (other than the log), caches in the woods along a cache populated hiking trail that don't have much ingenuity, creativity, or reason beyond just being there, the LBH at the posted coordinates instead of using letterbox directions (or not having a stamp), a regular cache with no swag or swag that's just not that good, a bridge hide that mimics a well-liked cache but isn't done nearly as well, a multi that started out with a promising idea but resorts to standard styles of hides seen countless times before, a virtual that is liked only because it's old and it's a rarer type, a Wherigo that makes you walk around a baseball field in order to score a run and be able to find the final, etc....

There's nothing wrong with those types of caches; however, they're just.....there.  They're not geo-litter but they don't accrue lots of FPs because they're really not that interesting.  I have no problem finding those types of caches.  They just don't get me excited about caching like the 5-10% I DO find that I really enjoy for whatever reason that might be.

 

I appreciate your honesty...  "it's probably more like 90-95% of the caches I find are in that range and the 10-5% are the ones that I really enjoy. "

 

[+coachstahly]

2 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

I appreciate your honesty...  "it's probably more like 90-95% of the caches I find are in that range and the 10-5% are the ones that I really enjoy. "

 

You DO understand that that percentage includes a very large percentage of caches that have nothing wrong with them other than the fact that I just didn't find them that interesting?  

Most of the caches I filter out and keep on my infrequent runs are ones with no reported problems (usually), are smalls and above, can have a high FP total (or a high FP percentage), and are along the way to the target caches I specifically chose for that particular caching trip.  I like visiting cemeteries and here in Indiana we have an Indiana Spirit Quest series.  Most of them are just regular run of the mill caches but it's the cemetery that is highlighted.  Bonus points for a cache, but that's sometimes how these really small cemeteries get visitors other than just the locals.  The caches aren't great but that doesn't detract from a Revolutionary soldier buried there, or a fellow Navy shipmate interred there, or the unique headstone on display.

[+Clongo_Rongo]

18 hours ago, The Magna Defender said:

The problem I have is that most cachers nowadays are so fixated on the state of the cache, they never ever say anything about the walk they've done, the wildlife theyve seen or the gorgeous views. They are just so fixated on the scrawl of dingy paper they write nothing else on their online log. As a CO I want to hear about their experiences and frankly that's gone out the window in recent years. 

looking at a few stats on people who comment a lot about the need for clean dry logs on all caches don't seem to own or have many active, I think when you get passed 350 active caches you get to understand why the logs may not be at there best.

so when out doing a series you must expect that logs won't be good sometimes, not matter the type of container in the log is in.

I have a few containers that cost over £20 each and the stamp was £15 as custom made, 2/3 years on the logs are showing there age, 

so the question, having too many caches is not an issue and the majority of caches understand the hard work that it takes to own/place many caches.

if there was a limit on how many caches are active/owned, this still would not solve the problem of maintaining caches/logs.

 

 

[+NYPaddleCacher]

3 minutes ago, CHEZRASCALS said:

18 hours ago, The Magna Defender said:

The problem I have is that most cachers nowadays are so fixated on the state of the cache, they never ever say anything about the walk they've done, the wildlife theyve seen or the gorgeous views. They are just so fixated on the scrawl of dingy paper they write nothing else on their online log. As a CO I want to hear about their experiences and frankly that's gone out the window in recent years. 

looking at a few stats on people who comment a lot about the need for clean dry logs on all caches don't seem to own or have many active, I think when you get passed 350 active caches you get to understand why the logs may not be at there best.

Are you aware that there are some here that use a separate account for the forums than they're player account?  It may be unreasonable to expect every log to be in pristine condition, but using "I have over 350 caches" as an excuse for having a lot of "logs that may not be at there best" doesn't cut it. 

[+Clongo_Rongo]

20 hours ago, The Magna Defender said:

Do other cache owners get this level of scrutiny from you regarding their caches? There are over 2 million cachers in the world. The fact you are stalking just one constitutes harassment. 

I saw a cache recently that a finder left a negative comment and put it on watch knowing that it was incorrect and wanted to start a forum on the cache page, but this did not work and many logs later the local community are finding it and enjoying it and no reference to any issues 

[+The A-Team]

21 hours ago, The Magna Defender said:

Do other cache owners get this level of scrutiny from you regarding their caches? There are over 2 million cachers in the world. The fact you are stalking just one constitutes harassment. 

When a certain cacher has demonstrated a penchant for drama and situations that can be entertaining to those not involved, I can see why someone might want to keep an eye on things.

As far as "caches will inevitably get wet", that just shows that the container is not a suitable one for geocaching. One of the most basic attributes of an appropriate geocaching container is that it should keep the contents safe from the weather, whether that's damage from UV rays in a hot environment or moisture in a frequently-damp and cool environment. If appropriate containers are "too expensive", then a good suggestion would be to opt for quality rather than quantity and hide fewer - but more weatherproof - containers.

[+Clongo_Rongo]

21 hours ago, The Magna Defender said:

How about you stop watching other people's caches. 

but if they stop watching, they don't see the Fav Points been awarded 

[+L0ne.R]

21 minutes ago, CHEZRASCALS said:

any chance you can edit your post to comment correctly - thanks

What needs to be edited?  I for one have another account for my hides.

I’ve been hiding caches since 2002. On average had 15 active cache hides a year. We have always taken great pride in providing a good experience from start to finish. 15 active cache has been easy to manage with our busy schedule (family and full time jobs). We’re  down to 4 active cache hides now because I’m not crazy about the current quantity-over-quality culture and how group caching for numbers have affected our cache hides. 

[+niraD]

54 minutes ago, CHEZRASCALS said:

I think when you get passed 350 active caches you get to understand why

Oh, that's right. The subject of this thread is "You have too many caches when..."

Thanks for the reminder.

[+Clongo_Rongo]

13 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

What needs to be edited?  I for one have another account for my hides.

 

I wrote - I think when you get passed 350 active caches

not

but using "I have over 350 caches"