Jump to content

What size is more proper according to you?


Kæmel
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

I have 2 caches. The box with the log itself is micro and only contains the log. But is hidden in a small 25x15 cm concrete bear. And the other one a 20x10 homemade concrete stone.

Would you choose this caches as micro or like regular? 


 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Kæmel said:

I have 2 caches. The box with the log itself is micro and only contains the log. But is hidden in a small 25x15 cm concrete bear. And the other one a 20x10 homemade concrete stone.

Would you choose this caches as micro or like regular? 

When I find the larger "host" (the concrete bear or the concrete stone), will I know that I have found the cache? Or will I have to find the micro-size container hidden inside the host before I know that I have found the cache?

 

If I'm looking for the larger host, but the actual container is micro-size, then I would list it as Other.

 

If I'm looking for the micro-size container, and finding the larger host doesn't reveal that I've found the cache, then I would list it as Micro.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Kæmel said:

I have 2 caches. The box with the log itself is micro and only contains the log. But is hidden in a small 25x15 cm concrete bear. And the other one a 20x10 homemade concrete stone.

Would you choose this caches as micro or like regular? 


 

Still micro. The rest is camouflage.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
On 9/9/2021 at 7:19 AM, Kæmel said:

I have 2 caches. The box with the log itself is micro and only contains the log. But is hidden in a small 25x15 cm concrete bear. And the other one a 20x10 homemade concrete stone.

Would you choose this caches as micro or like regular? 


 

I'd use 'other' and likely say, the container is the size of a small, or regular (if it is shoebox/ammunition tin size), but has the internal space of a micro. Giving the internal size, reduces the disappointment and possibly annoyance * of someone arriving with a TB, etc and not being able to fit it, as they thought the container was big enough because of the rating. As I wrote for this cache of mine: GC55AQQ. It's a train engine (small sized) and the cache is the chimney; a bison tube, so internal space is micro.

 

* I drove over 300kms (each way) to take a TB I brought to Australia from the UK to leave it in the exact requested suburb in Sydney. I visited small rated caches, and cache after cache were micro, not the rated small. After driving that far it annoyed me that (insert impolite word:rolleyes:....) people couldn't be bothered to rate their caches correctly. I began to wonder if I would ever find a real small or larger cache. I did eventually, but I shouldn't have had to visit several wrongly 'small' rated MICRO caches trying to find one.

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Upvote 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment

I'm with colleda, pretty much for the reasons Goldenwattle listed.

 

On my caches, I'll list the size as the available space for the log, swaps, TB's etc (or lack thereof), and allude to, describe or drop hints about the camouflage - depending on the circumstances. It needs to be somewhat situation specific (a magnetic nano on a dumpster wouldn't count the dumpster as camo), but in Kæmel's examples, the cache itself is the bison tube - the outer camouflage is just the thing hiding it.

 

In the case of the concrete bear, a hint like "I like honey" or "look out for Pooh" may be enough of a hint so that when searchers see the bear, they'll know they're on the right track. Adjust the hint(s) as needed to make the rating harder or easier as desired.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Unit473L said:

I'm with colleda, pretty much for the reasons Goldenwattle listed.

 

On my caches, I'll list the size as the available space for the log, swaps, TB's etc (or lack thereof), and allude to, describe or drop hints about the camouflage - depending on the circumstances. It needs to be somewhat situation specific (a magnetic nano on a dumpster wouldn't count the dumpster as camo), but in Kæmel's examples, the cache itself is the bison tube - the outer camouflage is just the thing hiding it.

 

In the case of the concrete bear, a hint like "I like honey" or "look out for Pooh" may be enough of a hint so that when searchers see the bear, they'll know they're on the right track. Adjust the hint(s) as needed to make the rating harder or easier as desired.

I have a large spider with a bison tube in its rear. Initially I was unsure what to rate it and rated it 'micro'. After getting a negative log about looking for a micro in a haystack type log, I rethought it and called it an 'other'. They were correct; listing it as micro when it's larger, and wasting their time with looking in every micro sized crack and hole, does make the hunt a needle in a haystack search. Since I corrected it to other, there have been no complaints. I too have been in that position, methodically searching every crack, every hole, under bark, under leaves, etc, etc, when I then find a cache larger than a small. It has taken FAR longer than it would have (possibly for a 1.5D) if the size had been rated more helpfully, as most of the places I had searched I wouldn't have bothered with. Very frustrating hunts those.

Other.

Link to comment
15 hours ago, Kæmel said:

I have 2 caches. The box with the log itself is micro and only contains the log. But is hidden in a small 25x15 cm concrete bear. And the other one a 20x10 homemade concrete stone.

Would you choose this caches as micro or like regular?

Micro.

 

The bear and the stone are just "camo". A simple micro hidden under a stone is a clear case - find the "suspicious" stone, lift it, find the micro cache. In your case, it's effectively the same - find the "suspicious" stone, lift it, examine it, find the micro in/at it.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, baer2006 said:

Micro.

 

The bear and the stone are just "camo". A simple micro hidden under a stone is a clear case - find the "suspicious" stone, lift it, find the micro cache. In your case, it's effectively the same - find the "suspicious" stone, lift it, examine it, find the micro in/at it.

The micros with the examples of my caches are firmly part of the larger object. One became the train funnel and the other the rear of the spider, like a rear orifice, being cemented in. They have melded with the train and spider, so no longer can be described as in, under, etc. they are part of the objects.

404119403_FyshwickChooChoo2.thumb.jpg.9054f20577b62a2a96aee44f71e75fb7.jpg

 

 

Cache.thumb.jpg.2f7da711f357713738feb9689fc3e163.jpg

 

 

Edited by Goldenwattle
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

The micros with the examples of my caches are firmly part of the larger object. One became the train funnel and the other the rear of the spider, like a rear orifice, being cemented in. They have melded with the train and spider, so no longer can be described as in, under, etc. they are part of the objects.

 

Yes, I agree. This is one of my novelty caches:

 

WombatHollow.jpg.151c9b9a0629336378331460bfda560c.jpg

 

The wombat is hollow and has an internal volume of several litres, but to protect the logbook from moisture and dirt I've added an internal 380ml Sistema that slips inside it:

 

hollow_wombat.jpg.6ce3adc4a383d1ae51a58ea57cdfcf36.jpg

 

I've listed it as a regular as that's the size of the object I placed there. I don't consider the wombat as camo as it's not meant to camouflage the cache, quite the opposite in fact as the Sistema just sitting by itself would be a lot harder to spot. The wombat is the cache and the Sistema is just an extra layer of protection for the log. If someone had a trackable that wouldn't fit inside the Sistema, they could always just put it loose inside the wombat, but leaving trackables there probably isn't a good idea since the cache is pretty remote (a 6km hike each way) and has only had one finder this year, so anything left there won't do much travelling.

 

Furthermore, having it listed as a regular limits the number of potential hiding places to be searched, particularly as the area around GZ has become increasingly overgrown and there are just way too many places where you could potentially hide a small.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, colleda said:

Still micro. The rest is camouflage.

If the "host" object really is camouflage, then I agree with you. If I find the "host" object and don't know that I've found the cache, then I'm really looking for the micro-size container, not the "host" object. In that case, listing it as micro makes more sense.

 

But sometimes it's obvious that the "host" object is the cache, but the actual container inside is micro-size. I'm looking for a larger object with a micro-size container, so listing it as other makes more sense.

 

 

1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

The micros with the examples of my caches are firmly part of the larger object.

I don't think it matters how "firmly" attached the container is to the "host" object. A tree stump with a bison tube is still pretty much the same regardless of whether the bison tube has been epoxied into a hole, or whether the bison tube can slide in and out of the hole.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, niraD said:

I don't think it matters how "firmly" attached the container is to the "host" object. A tree stump with a bison tube is still pretty much the same regardless of whether the bison tube has been epoxied into a hole, or whether the bison tube can slide in and out of the hole.

I think it's common sense here. A natural tree stump, part of the landscape is different to an introduced object. Same with a boulder or tree. If the rating is going to cause confusion and disappointment, it's better to explain that there will be no rooms for TBs, etc. Save people making a special trip to leave a TB.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
17 hours ago, Kæmel said:

I have 2 caches. The box with the log itself is micro and only contains the log. But is hidden in a small 25x15 cm concrete bear. And the other one a 20x10 homemade concrete stone.

Would you choose this caches as micro or like regular? 


 

Can I leave swag or expect to find any? No? Then it's a micro. Might go with "other" to explain the larger container the micro is inside.

 

  • Funny 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I think it's common sense here. A natural tree stump, part of the landscape is different to an introduced object. Same with a boulder or tree. If the rating is going to cause confusion and disappointment, it's better to explain that there will be no rooms for TBs, etc. Save people making a special trip to leave a TB.

Whether you drill a boulder or stump of your own and bring it to the site, or whether you drill an existing boulder or stump (WITH PERMISSION), I think what matters is whether finding the "host" object reveals that you've found the geocache, or whether you need to find the micro-size container within the "host" object before you know that you've found the geocache.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Ed_S said:

Can I leave swag or expect to find any? No? Then it's a micro. Might go with "other" to explain the larger container the micro is inside.

 

A special case, yes, but I have three caches hidden in a national park where one of the parks service's rules is no swag or trackables. Should these be listed as micros even though they clearly aren't?

 

NPCaches.jpg.8548059e2b832c54deee33002ce83584.jpg

 

When I go out caching, my goal is to find the cache, not somewhere to dump a load of swag. I want the size rating to indicate how big the thing is I'm looking for so I can narrow down the range of places I have to search at GZ. If it's listed as a micro, I'm going to be focusing on places someone is likely to poke a micro into, like a knot-hole in a tree or small honeycombing in a rock, rather than the larger hiding places like a deep rock cavity or a tree stump, especially if it has a low D rating. I'm not interested in swag and rarely have trackables to drop, so insisting the size rating be based on those makes it useless to me.

 

Here's another one of mine:

 

DSC_0357.thumb.jpg.a99102a61631a2e5bf71911e363759a5.jpg

 

If I filled it with water it would hold a few hundred millilitres so I've listed it as a small. The logbook is rolled into a cylinder, put inside a small plastic bag along with the pencil and pushed into the crocodile's mouth. No room for swag or even a trackable, but I'm not going to change it to a micro because that would make it too hard to find. Anyway, it's not in a place where someone is likely to bring young kids looking to swap toys, it's meant for cachers who want to take on the interesting hike through the wetlands and get a bit of an idea of how big the thing is they're looking for so they can find it, sign the logbook and get back to civilisation before the tide comes in.

Edited by barefootjeff
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
18 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

A special case, yes, but I have three caches hidden in a national park where one of the parks service's rules is no swag or trackables. Should these be listed as micros even though they clearly aren't?

 

NPCaches.jpg.8548059e2b832c54deee33002ce83584.jpg

 

When I go out caching, my goal is to find the cache, not somewhere to dump a load of swag. I want the size rating to indicate how big the thing is I'm looking for so I can narrow down the range of places I have to search at GZ. If it's listed as a micro, I'm going to be focusing on places someone is likely to poke a micro into, like a knot-hole in a tree or small honeycombing in a rock, rather than the larger hiding places like a deep rock cavity or a tree stump, especially if it has a low D rating. I'm not interested in swag and rarely have trackables to drop, so insisting the size rating be based on those makes it useless to me.

 

Here's another one of mine:

 

DSC_0357.thumb.jpg.a99102a61631a2e5bf71911e363759a5.jpg

 

If I filled it with water it would hold a few hundred millilitres so I've listed it as a small. The logbook is rolled into a cylinder, put inside a small plastic bag along with the pencil and pushed into the crocodile's mouth. No room for swag or even a trackable, but I'm not going to change it to a micro because that would make it too hard to find. Anyway, it's not in a place where someone is likely to bring young kids looking to swap toys, it's meant for cachers who want to take on the interesting hike through the wetlands and get a bit of an idea of how big the thing is they're looking for so they can find it, sign the logbook and get back to civilisation before the tide comes in.

A "few" years ago I did a collection of caches in a rather large park, called Monty's 50. There were/are 50 caches that are micros, but are hidden inside something. I think Monty must have raided his kids' toybox or something! Here's the first in the series: https://coord.info/GC4JQ0Y  If you're in that area, on the Ohio/PA border near the Ohio River, I highly recommend checking out this park. There are a lot more than just these 50 caches in there, and no matter what kind of terrain you like, you'll find it!

 

Link to comment
On 9/10/2021 at 12:24 AM, Ed_S said:

Can I leave swag or expect to find any? No? Then it's a micro. Might go with "other" to explain the larger container the micro is inside.

 

"Other" gives no indication of size at all. It gives no indication that it can accept trackables or could contain swag.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, colleda said:

"Other" gives no indication of size at all. It gives no indication that it can accept trackables or could contain swag.

True, but if the CO wants to provide an indication, then that can be in the cache description (e.g., "a regular-size object, but there is only room for the log sheet").

Link to comment

The bear cache has no hint ,because its a bear and its open in a very remote place. Its on the side of the hicking track, noone would find it unless you loolinng for it. Also the cache name is called 'Little bear' but in Norwegian 😅 When you see it , ypu know thsts it. 

 

Om the stone cache its in a small headland which is reacheble half of the time during time water. The hnt for this one is 'fits into the inviorment, well camouflaged'. At this locarions its only some grass and stones. 

 

In the description for this caches it says that its only containing log.

 

I listed it as micro.

Link to comment
17 hours ago, colleda said:

"Other" gives no indication of size at all. It gives no indication that it can accept trackables or could contain swag.

"Other" is meant to give you the idea that it's not just a simple micro/small/et al. A conscientious CO would include pertinent information on the cache page. 

 

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
9 hours ago, Ed_S said:

"Other" is meant to give you the idea that it's not just a simple micro/small/et al. A conscientious CO would include pertinent information on the cache page. 

 

Other, to me, indicates that you are searching for something out of the ordinary. something that does not fit normal container descriptions. I have micros that have larger camo and, as you suggested, I make it known in the description. Here's and example where there is also a hint within the hint.

GC4R3JD

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Well, that beat me. Is Jethro Tull a person?

Jethro Tull was a person but not the one in the hint. If you were my vintage you would know immediately to what it, the name, refers.

Think 60's rock band headed by a flautist who plays while standing on one leg. Hmm?-_-

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
7 minutes ago, colleda said:

Jethro Tull was a person but not the one in the hint. If you were my vintage you would know immediately to what it, the name, refers.

Think 60's rock band headed by a flautist who plays while standing on one leg. Hmm?-_-

I was born in the 1950s. Nothing still comes to mind, but music has never been a big thing for me. Plus I was a teenager in a small, country town. Some would call it a village.

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

I was born in the 1950s. Nothing still comes to mind, but music has never been a big thing for me. Plus I was a teenager in a small, country town. Some would call it a village.

Another hint I could have used would be "Short on intelligence"  = _ _ _ _ _ as a _ _ _ _ _

Sorry for OT.

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, colleda said:

Another hint I could have used would be "Short on intelligence"  = _ _ _ _ _ as a _ _ _ _ _

Sorry for OT.

Sorry, I am short of intelligence here, as I have no idea. Absolutely none. I would need to research this, and this can be tricky in the field.

Edited by Goldenwattle
Link to comment

I must say thank you all for your replies. It gave now a somewhat more understanding of your thoughts and ideas around the subject and I made mine now as well. Ill go for micro. In the description Ill always mention its containing log only and as for hint Ill give a 'well camouflaged' hint.  

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
12 hours ago, colleda said:

Jethro Tull was a person but not the one in the hint. If you were my vintage you would know immediately to what it, the name, refers.

Think 60's rock band headed by a flautist who plays while standing on one leg. Hmm?-_-

You mean Ian Anderson? (yeah, I'm that old, too!) 

Link to comment
On 9/11/2021 at 9:58 PM, colleda said:

Another hint I could have used would be "Short on intelligence"  = _ _ _ _ _ as a _ _ _ _ _

So many choices, so little time:

Dumb as a box of rocks.

Dumb as a doorknob.

Dumb as a bag of hammers.

Dumb as a brick.

Dumb as a post.

Dumb as a stump.

Stupid as a mud crab.

Stupid as a donkey.

Stupid as a lamp post.

Thick as a bowl of oatmeal.

Dull as a brush.

Dull as a dishwasher.

Dull as a doornail.

Brainless as a chimpanzee.

Simple as a pie.

Simple as a pimple.

...

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...