Groundspeak doesn't want us to hide new caches?

[+Mudfrog]

23 hours ago, coachstahly said:

I frequently include containers in my caches as swag without ever mentioning it in my description.  It's not to encourage new hides, but rather to clear out some excess stuff I've been given that I typically won't place myself or don't have any immediate plans to put out.  It has included bison tubes, bison tube inserts, dog tags, copper garden tags, smaller lock-n-lock style containers, diabetes test strip containers, screw top false bottom medical vials, PETs, the two bottle cap containers and yes, even the occasional pill bottle I tend to be given at events where such things are given away.

 

So you're the one behind this mess!  I was wondering where all these dang micros were coming from... 

[+HunterandSamuel]

51 minutes ago, coachstahly said:

Personally, I'd stay away from pill bottles and suggest others do to.  The only way I've truly found them to be decent containers are if they are within a larger container and contain the log.

 

I just saw this. Great advice, stay away from the small pill containers.  We do have pill/vitamin bottles that are large and we can even fit a short pencil and log inside, maybe even some swag. But it will have to be identified as swag somehow so they won't think it's the cache and end up signing the log inside the bottle. lol  Would it be even better to camo tape the bottle? We have the neatest camo tape. Outdoor Gorilla tape. Off topic. We bought bulk # 2 lead pencils at Staples. Sawed them in half to fit small cache containers. They also make nice swag. 

[+cerberus1]

2 hours ago, coachstahly said:

Personally, I'd stay away from pill bottles and suggest others do to.  

 

Yeah, I don't understand why folks have to go that route.

All the expenses of this hobby, and they had to make their cache container the cheapest thing ?

We picked up (a CITO) most of a series once because the CO "recycled" carp that others would have thrown away.

They didn't even say anything afterwards.  They knew how the things looked...

We've had a few others (roadside and parks mostly) end up with a NM after a good CITO in a park.   

[+HunterandSamuel]

A photo of one of our large pill bottles. Not cheaply made. Had to buy the duct tape, fake grass rug, swag, log, and pencil, etc and placed a rubber seal inside the lid to keep the swag & log dry. Took awhile to make too. Got ten favorites so far on it. 

 

 

 

 

[+HunterandSamuel]

Also, I think Groundspeak would want geocachers to be inventive and recycle these types of plastic bottles. We are huge fans of their CITO program, carry garbage bags with us when geocaching so I think creative recycling goes hand in hand. 

[Keystone]

The past 10 or so posts have all been off-topic.

 

Discussing cool cache containers is a great topic, but it's not this thread.

 

Back to our prior discussion, then - thanks!

[+HunterandSamuel]

16 minutes ago, Keystone said:

The past 10 or so posts have all been off-topic.

 

Discussing cool cache containers is a great topic, but it's not this thread.

 

Back to our prior discussion, then - thanks!

 

Thanks for waking us up!  I'm a bit concerned because I do have in some of my past cache descriptions the giveaway cache containers for FTFs. The intention wasn't to encourage cachers to hide them, just some neat unique gifts. I think I'll go through them and delete the FTFs giveaways. They have been found anyway. The good news is they have been found by seasoned cachers who will probably be hiding a cache anyway. 

[+fuzziebear3]

I think the takeaway here is that it is okay to have cache containers in a cache as swag, but that the cache listing cannot be for the purpose of or encourage people to place new caches.

 

 

[+Ragnemalm]

On 1/24/2020 at 1:37 AM, BethDaddyKaty said:

I would say a cache container is like the "signature" of a CO. As such I wouldn't appreciate being given a container with the *expectation* I should hide it.

 

I understand the conflict. I would say that there is a certain difference between expectation and encouragement but it is also easy to confuse them.

 

A related encouragement is that of encouraging cache maintenance. A friend of one made a "cache maintenance stash" with some items useful for maintaining caches (like log books and pencils) - with the undertones that we can help each other with cache maintenance. That is also not allowed according to the rules, but is there any real reason for it?

[+BethDaddyKaty]

1 hour ago, Ragnemalm said:

 

I understand the conflict. I would say that there is a certain difference between expectation and encouragement but it is also easy to confuse them.

 

A related encouragement is that of encouraging cache maintenance. A friend of one made a "cache maintenance stash" with some items useful for maintaining caches (like log books and pencils) - with the undertones that we can help each other with cache maintenance. That is also not allowed according to the rules, but is there any real reason for it?

With you on that, as a new cacher I cant understand the strong feelings among some against repairing camo, replacing damaged/full log books. Doing so would seem to be the community spirited thing to me rather than asking a CO to trek out to do something that takes you 30 seconds.

[+L0ne.R]

I removed the post because it is off topic. 

 

Edited January 27, 2020 by L0ne.R

[+HunterandSamuel]

Bringing this thread back on topic so it doesn't get closed. This is a good topic.  I learned a few things here and even deleted recently a FTF prize in one of my hides that said...FTF rock cache to hide your own cache. 

[+coachstahly]

1 hour ago, BethDaddyKaty said:

With you on that, as a new cacher I cant understand the strong feelings among some against repairing camo, replacing damaged/full log books. Doing so would seem to be the community spirited thing to me rather than asking a CO to trek out to do something that takes you 30 seconds.

 

I'm in agreement with some of this, but not all of it.  I fully agree with replacing full logs, if I have a replacement on me.  I email the CO and send them a message and tell them I'm happy to take a photo of the log, physically hand it to them, or even mail it to them if they want it back.  I've only had one contact me and they asked for a photo, which I did.  I'll never file a NM log for a full log because other than that issue, the integrity of the cache is still solid. I do get why others file NM logs for this but it's not something I would do.  This also depends on the condition of the container (see below).

 

As to a damaged log, I'll only consider replacing a damaged log if I believe the container is still in good enough shape that the replacement log won't just turn out to be the same type of damaged log I found.  If the container is bad (cracked, missing a lid, not watertight anymore), it's just delaying the inevitable and it needs to be fixed by the CO or replaced by the CO.  I'll file the NM log because it's not my cache to maintain.  While it certainly would be "nice" of me to fix it for them, I typically don't carry supplies to fix a broken/damaged container and I think that would be going a bit beyond a courtesy to the CO.  It's their cache so it's their cache to fix.

 

If the container is full of water and it appears to be in good shape (can't find any cracks or any obvious reason water is inside the container), I'll dry the stuff out and then put it all back together.  However, if there's an obvious reason and it will just result in another container full of water, I will empty it out and attempt to sign the log and then file the NM log as well.

 

As far as camo goes, again, I don't carry those types of supplies with me as they're at home for my potential caches.  I won't file a NM log for missing/loose camo because it doesn't affect the integrity of the cache, only makes it more visible to muggles.  I will make mention of it in my log though, so the CO is aware.  

 

I don't really take into consideration the type of cache when it comes to any minor maintenance I might offer up on my own. If the container is in good enough shape to keep the items/log inside dry, then I'll help out.  Otherwise, I won't.

 

I don't see many caches that have supplies for minor maintenance in them as the trend has been toward micro containers being hidden. 

[+bflentje]

On 1/27/2020 at 2:13 PM, BethDaddyKaty said:

With you on that, as a new cacher I cant understand the strong feelings among some against repairing camo, replacing damaged/full log books. Doing so would seem to be the community spirited thing to me rather than asking a CO to trek out to do something that takes you 30 seconds.

 

For me there are two very important reasons..

 

1. A cache owner agrees to take on the responsibility. Why should the rest of us have an obligation.

2. I find about 1250 caches a year. If I carried materials and stopped and repaired EVERY cache that needed it, that's all I'd be doing.

 

When I was a younger and a newer cacher I used to have the same ideals. I'd carry baggies, logs, pencils, toys, until I realized I was footing the bill and wasting my time on things that others had an obligation to. My weapon is now NM and NA. It works for me. You do what works for you.

[+coachstahly]

18 minutes ago, bflentje said:

 

For me there are two very important reasons..

 

1. A cache owner agrees to take on the responsibility. Why should the rest of us have an obligation.

2. I find about 1250 caches a year. If I carried materials and stopped and repaired EVERY cache that needed it, that's all I'd be doing.

 

When I was a younger and a newer cacher I used to have the same ideals. I'd carry baggies, logs, pencils, toys, until I realized I was footing the bill and wasting my time on things that others had an obligation to. My weapon is now NM and NA. It works for me. You do what works for you.

 

1.  I think the point is that for many who do offer up some help, it's not an obligation but something they wish to do on their own.  I never see any minor maintenance I offer up as an obligation to fix their cache.  I see it as a choice of mine to help out, but only if the cache itself is in good enough shape. I know some CO's see it as an obligation for others to perform maintenance and I fully disagree with that point of view.

 

2.  Yes, but what percentage of those 1250 caches you find actually need maintenance?  At least in my primary area, it's about 10%, but I'm not finding as many as you are.  Also, of that 10%, some of the containers aren't in good enough shape for me to offer up my aid, which again limits the number of caches I help.  I'm rarely over 500 so my total of offered minor maintenance might approach 50 in a given year.  I do understand what you're saying though, that if we were "obligated/mandated" to help, that it would certainly be cost and time prohibitive and leave little time for us to do other things.

 

As to your "weapon", I have a small issue with you calling it that.  All it is is a tool that we can use to notify COs (and then reviewers if it's ignored) that their cache needs tending to.  "Weaponizing" it is part of the problem of why COs tend to be affronted by someone filing a NM log, IMO.  It's a tool that many opt not to use, even though they should and that's part of the problem.

 

 

[+barefootjeff]

On 1/28/2020 at 7:13 AM, BethDaddyKaty said:

With you on that, as a new cacher I cant understand the strong feelings among some against repairing camo, replacing damaged/full log books. Doing so would seem to be the community spirited thing to me rather than asking a CO to trek out to do something that takes you 30 seconds.

 

Sometimes, maybe, the CO actually wants to be the one who maintains their caches. Is that a bad thing? Recently a cacher mentioned in his log on one of my hides that a rodent had been nibbling the container's handles, a stock standard 1 litre Sistema. Perhaps he needn't have mentioned that, instead just replacing the handles from the stock of spare Sistemas he lugs around on the off-chance they might be needed, or maybe sacrificing his son's lunch box (sorry Samuel), but I'm glad he didn't because replacing the handles or even the whole container wouldn't have solved the underlying problem. As soon as I saw his log, I realised what was really required and replaced the plastic container with a (hopefully) rodent-proof metal one to my liking:

 

 

Concerns over the pros and cons of community maintenance become moot if you have COs who want to be COs, are proud of their creations and want to honour the commitments they agreed to when they ticked that box on the submission form. Putting containers in caches to encourage finders to hide more caches runs counter to that, because it puts people in the position of feeling obliged to make a cache out of that container they were given. It puts the cart before the horse. Instead of coming across a great location that deserves a cache and designing something to complement it, you're instead starting with the container and then looking for somewhere to plonk it so it's not cluttering up your desk. The result is uninspiring hides and disinterested COs.

 

[+cerberus1]

On 1/27/2020 at 3:13 PM, BethDaddyKaty said:

With you on that, as a new cacher I cant understand the strong feelings among some against repairing camo, replacing damaged/full log books. Doing so would seem to be the community spirited thing to me rather than asking a CO to trek out to do something that takes you 30 seconds.

 

I prefer that no one else "rig" my caches.

We act on mentions in logs,  not waiting for a NM.   Few write NM, so reading the logs is a good thing.

 

We use Rite in Rain notebooks in larger hides, and RiR strips in our only micro.  A piece of notebook paper isn't a good fix to me... 

We've never used a piece of carp container.  No pill bottles or gladware here. 

Ammo cans,  lock n locks,  and matchstick cases are the norm now.

Log a NM and I'll bring a good one out on the rare time something's wrong.  

Just mention it in your log, I'll see it...

 

We see few logbooks, with most using double-wide paper strips in their caches.   I see a couple mentioning "books" often here.

Our logbooks are a whole different animal than a paper strip, and I want to keep them if there's ever a time they get filled.

 

[+HunterandSamuel]

On 1/22/2020 at 7:16 PM, JohnCNA said:

I just don't get the part about not encouraging others to place caches. Not talking about requiring anything. Just encouraging. Oh well, I'm sure there have been some abuses and complaints somewhere. And personally, I'd just as soon not see a flood of new urban pill bottles anyway. ?

 

Getting back on topic. As mentioned, I went through my descriptions and found one that was giving a rock cache as a FTF prize and said "to hide your own cache". I deleted it. But like some mentioned,  just place it in the cache with a FTF note or as swag?

[+bflentje]

23 hours ago, coachstahly said:

As to your "weapon", I have a small issue with you calling it that.  All it is is a tool that we can use to notify COs (and then reviewers if it's ignored) that their cache needs tending to.  "Weaponizing" it is part of the problem of why COs tend to be affronted by someone filing a NM log, IMO.  It's a tool that many opt not to use, even though they should and that's part of the problem.

 

 

Easily triggered? It was just a phrase. Please over analyze someone else's posts.

[+The Jester]

10 hours ago, bflentje said:

 

Easily triggered? It was just a phrase. Please over analyze someone else's posts.

If you don't want people to react to your words, don't post them in public places.

[+coachstahly]

20 hours ago, bflentje said:

 

Easily triggered? It was just a phrase. Please over analyze someone else's posts.

 

I realize it's just a phrase and I understand your intent but you're making it sound more like something done out of spite, aggressiveness, or angst instead of doing it because it's the right thing to do.  COs see them as attacks instead of a tool to let them know something is wrong their cache and you just reinforced that notion by calling it a weapon. NM logs aren't bad but for some reason or another, many COs think they are.  We don't need to stigmatize a NM log by making it out to be something confrontational; we need to normalize a NM log.

 

[+Ragnemalm]

On 1/29/2020 at 7:24 PM, bflentje said:

1. A cache owner agrees to take on the responsibility. Why should the rest of us have an obligation.

2. I find about 1250 caches a year. If I carried materials and stopped and repaired EVERY cache that needed it, that's all I'd be doing.

 

When I was a younger and a newer cacher I used to have the same ideals. I'd carry baggies, logs, pencils, toys, until I realized I was footing the bill and wasting my time on things that others had an obligation to. My weapon is now NM and NA. It works for me. You do what works for you.

 

1. I thought we agreed that the thread was about encouragement, not obligation.

2. It is no big effort to me to have a few emergency logs (the far ends of the paper when I cut my logs, they go there instead of trashing them) in my wallet and two or three petling caps in my pocket when going out caching (put aside when I put a PET bottle in the recycling bin). The trick in IMHO to do the small and easy things that helps. Saving these emergency logs is as easy as putting them in the trash. The petling caps almost so. I won't always be able to fix every cache that needs it, but I can handle the easy ones.

[+kunarion]

26 minutes ago, Ragnemalm said:

 

1. I thought we agreed that the thread was about encouragement, not obligation.

2. It is no big effort to me to have a few emergency logs (the far ends of the paper when I cut my logs, they go there instead of trashing them) in my wallet and two or three petling caps in my pocket when going out caching (put aside when I put a PET bottle in the recycling bin). The trick in IMHO to do the small and easy things that helps. Saving these emergency logs is as easy as putting them in the trash. The petling caps almost so. I won't always be able to fix every cache that needs it, but I can handle the easy ones.

 

The thread is about a cache publication being denied when placed as a seed cache full of little containers to create more caches.

 

I used to place logs in caches that need it.  And I've lately realized those same caches always need it, so I'm trying to "replace logs" less often while trying to not get my head bit off by Geocachers for not "simply replacing the log for that poor guy".  Looks like it's about obligation after all. 

[+cerberus1]

1 hour ago, Ragnemalm said:

1. I thought we agreed that the thread was about encouragement, not obligation.

2. It is no big effort to me to have a few emergency logs (the far ends of the paper when I cut my logs, they go there instead of trashing them) in my wallet and two or three petling caps in my pocket when going out caching (put aside when I put a PET bottle in the recycling bin). The trick in IMHO to do the small and easy things that helps. Saving these emergency logs is as easy as putting them in the trash. The petling caps almost so. I won't always be able to fix every cache that needs it, but I can handle the easy ones.

 

The thread is  "Groundspeak doesn't want us to hide new caches ?"   

The OP's friend said on faceboook:

PSA: I learned something new (to me) last night. Groundspeak doesn't want us to encourage others to place geocaches. I submitted a new cache which is stocked with ready made caches and in the description suggested people take one and place it. Not allowed.

 

"Who's responsible for logs"  like in most threads for some odd reason, got added-in off-topic.    

ETA... Oops.  See that kunarion covered that.

 

Edited February 2, 2020 by cerberus1

[+HunterandSamuel]

On 1/31/2020 at 10:14 AM, coachstahly said:

 

I realize it's just a phrase and I understand your intent but you're making it sound more like something done out of spite, aggressiveness, or angst instead of doing it because it's the right thing to do.  COs see them as attacks instead of a tool to let them know something is wrong their cache and you just reinforced that notion by calling it a weapon. NM logs aren't bad but for some reason or another, many COs think they are.  We don't need to stigmatize a NM log by making it out to be something confrontational; we need to normalize a NM log.

 

 

Well said. 

[+bflentje]

On 1/30/2020 at 11:20 PM, The Jester said:

If you don't want people to react to your words, don't post them in public places.

 

There's reacting to words and then there's jumping to false conclusions. 

[+bflentje]

23 hours ago, Ragnemalm said:

 

1. I thought we agreed that the thread was about encouragement, not obligation.

2. It is no big effort to me to have a few emergency logs (the far ends of the paper when I cut my logs, they go there instead of trashing them) in my wallet and two or three petling caps in my pocket when going out caching (put aside when I put a PET bottle in the recycling bin). The trick in IMHO to do the small and easy things that helps. Saving these emergency logs is as easy as putting them in the trash. The petling caps almost so. I won't always be able to fix every cache that needs it, but I can handle the easy ones.

 

I encourage you to follow whatever philosophy that suits you. I won't judge you or jump to conclusions, and I for sure won't exaggerate a reaction to any of your posts. But for me and for those that think the same way as me, I won't be guilt-ed into maintaining other peoples caches when I have my own to worry about. But one thing is for sure (not directed at you), I will not be bullied into when or when not use NM or NA. I am pretty sure I have a good handle on when to "use those weapons that I have in my arsenal". :-)

[+JL_HSTRE]

Point of clarification from the Reviewers: is any mention of seed containers prohibited or does it depend on the verbage?

 

For example, could a cache page state:

"The starting swag includes 5 preforms with logsheets. Finders may take one of these performs without leaving anything in trade."

[+NYPaddleCacher]

17 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

Point of clarification from the Reviewers: is any mention of seed containers prohibited or does it depend on the verbage?

 

For example, could a cache page state:

"The starting swag includes 5 preforms with logsheets. Finders may take one of these performs without leaving anything in trade."

 

The fact that it included 5 preforms prepared with logsheets would , to me,  create the perception  that it was intended to be a seed cache.  A cache with a preform for the FTF,  on the other hand,  makes it seem like the CO is just adding something that the FTF could use as a prize.  

 

In the case of the "no commerical or agendas" guideline, while it usually boils down to the language used in the listing, it's the "perception" that's important.  

[+coachstahly]

On 2/3/2020 at 5:46 PM, JL_HSTRE said:

Point of clarification from the Reviewers: is any mention of seed containers prohibited or does it depend on the verbage?

 

For example, could a cache page state:

"The starting swag includes 5 preforms with logsheets. Finders may take one of these performs without leaving anything in trade."

 

I'm with NYPC on this.  I'm also thinking that the fact that you're not asking finders to trade for items equally (per the standard "suggestion" we have in place) would also help show that you might mean for them to be placed as future hides instead of just some extra prize/swag for finders.

 

At least in my area, I don't really recall anyone listing the initial swag inventory as part of their cache description from when I started in 2010.  I recall some older caches 2000-2006ish having an initial list but certainly not the newer ones.

[+cerberus1]

On 2/3/2020 at 5:46 PM, JL_HSTRE said:

Point of clarification from the Reviewers: is any mention of seed containers prohibited or does it depend on the verbage?

 

For example, could a cache page state:

"The starting swag includes 5 preforms with logsheets. Finders may take one of these performs without leaving anything in trade."

 

The guidelines say "cache pages cannot require or encourage players to place more caches.", so you might be safe.

 - But I feel you're pushing it.   

 

Do you normally mention all swag when placing a cache ?  Wouldn't your cache page be incorrect after just a few finders ?

 -  We haven't seen people mentioning swag "trades" in some time, so that must be a pain-in-the-can checking swag once or twice a month...

Maybe it's just me, but if I wanted to put cache containers in a cache, I wouldn't say anything about it on my cache page.

Though I'd put them in with a few other items to start the cache off.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

4 hours ago, coachstahly said:

 

I'm with NYPC on this.  I'm also thinking that the fact that you're not asking finders to trade for items equally (per the standard "suggestion" we have in place) would also help show that you might mean for them to be placed as future hides instead of just some extra prize/swag for finders.

 

At least in my area, I don't really recall anyone listing the initial swag inventory as part of their cache description from when I started in 2010.  I recall some older caches 2000-2006ish having an initial list but certainly not the newer ones.

 

When I first started in 2007, listing the initial swag seemed to be pretty common.

 

3 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

The guidelines say "cache pages cannot require or encourage players to place more caches.", so you might be safe.

 - But I feel you're pushing it.   

 

Agreed.  It just feels like taking advantage of a semantic loophole.  

[+cerberus1]

6 hours ago, coachstahly said:

 At least in my area, I don't really recall anyone listing the initial swag inventory as part of their cache description from when I started in 2010.

 I recall some older caches 2000-2006ish having an initial list but certainly not the newer ones.

Agreed.

'04 here, and we'd sometimes see swag mentioned on the cache page when there was a FTF "prize" in with it (giving "options"), or  new folks thrilled with what they put into their first cache.  

Later, realizing their cache page mentions swag that wasn't there for a year,  that kinda died out here quick.   

- So I'd think mentioning "ready-to-go" caches in as swag would be the same.  Pushing their luck with a Reviewer, and inaccurate after a couple finders.  

 

We haven't noticed anyone but us mention "trades" on finds in years either.  No one knows when "stuff" is gone until there...

[+niraD]

5 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

When I first started in 2007, listing the initial swag seemed to be pretty common.

I started a little before that, and yeah, a lot of caches listed the initial trade items. But I always thought it odd, because only the first few finders were likely to see any of that. By the time I found the cache, the initial trade items were almost always long gone.

[+Goldenwattle]

29 minutes ago, niraD said:

I started a little before that, and yeah, a lot of caches listed the initial trade items. But I always thought it odd, because only the first few finders were likely to see any of that. By the time I found the cache, the initial trade items were almost always long gone.

Yes, the list of trinkets, etc would be better made in a log, rather than the description.

[+L0ne.R]

6 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

10 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

The guidelines say "cache pages cannot require or encourage players to place more caches.", so you might be safe.

 - But I feel you're pushing it.   

 

Agreed.  It just feels like taking advantage of a semantic loophole.  

 

Quoting knowschad:

 

Give geocachers an envelope and they will push it. 

[+JL_HSTRE]

20 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

Do you normally mention all swag when placing a cache ?  Wouldn't your cache page be incorrect after just a few finders ?

 

I'm not interested in swag myself, but I have seen caches (albeit mostly older ones) that list their starting swag contents in the description.

 

Also, caches that mention when the swag has a theme.

[+JL_HSTRE]

17 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

It just feels like taking advantage of a semantic loophole.  

 

Not necessarily, depending on the intent of the guideline in a larger context.

 

The intent seems to be not creating any kind of pressure or obligation on finders to hide a cache, or take swag. There doesn't seem to be any problem with using containers as swag, or otherwise providing free cache containers.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

47 minutes ago, JL_HSTRE said:

 

Not necessarily, depending on the intent of the guideline in a larger context.

 

The intent seems to be not creating any kind of pressure or obligation on finders to hide a cache, or take swag. There doesn't seem to be any problem with using containers as swag, or otherwise providing free cache containers.

 

There isn't a problem if you put one or two containers in as swag.  If you put 10 containers in the cache, even if the cache description doesn't say anything about them,   that would create a perception that the cache is created as a seed cache for other placements. 

 

The guideline actually uses the phrase "require or encourage", not "pressure or obligation".   In fact, the guidelines use the phrase "require or encourage" seven times on the Geocache Hiding Guidelines page, so it seems to me that the intent is more about encouraging hiding caches rather than  "creating pressure or an obligation" for finders to hide a cache.  Simply putting 10 containers, with log sheets included,  would meet my definition of encouragement.  

[+JL_HSTRE]

On 2/6/2020 at 8:34 AM, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

There isn't a problem if you put one or two containers in as swag.  If you put 10 containers in the cache, even if the cache description doesn't say anything about them,   that would create a perception that the cache is created as a seed cache for other placements. 

 

The guideline actually uses the phrase "require or encourage", not "pressure or obligation".   In fact, the guidelines use the phrase "require or encourage" seven times on the Geocache Hiding Guidelines page, so it seems to me that the intent is more about encouraging hiding caches rather than  "creating pressure or an obligation" for finders to hide a cache.  Simply putting 10 containers, with log sheets included,  would meet my definition of encouragement.  

 

If 10 is encouragement why aren't 2?

[+cerberus1]

On 2/6/2020 at 7:21 AM, JL_HSTRE said:

I'm not interested in swag myself, but I have seen caches (albeit mostly older ones) that list their starting swag contents in the description.

 

I found one just yesterday in search, an '02  regular trad from a '00 hider,  that has a photo on the cache page of original contents.

I can see that, maybe similar to drawing in folks with a FTF prize.  Weren't that many cachers here then...

They called us "prolific"  cachers when we started, because we cached more than one day a week.