Virtual Caches...Good or Bad?

January 6, 2003

I am about to place my 1st actual cache but there is a great possibilty of a virtual cache near my place of employment. Are virtual caches true to the sport. I have found 1 virtual cache and I logged it. I think they can be fun if they are worth traveling to. Please give me your opinions.

"What tha hell?" Hank Hill

January 6, 2003

True to the sport? I think virtual caches are a valid pastime but not a cache in the true sense of the word. You will get a variety of opinions but suffice it to point out that they are accepted here. IMHO, if a cache of any physical kind can be placed nearby an attraction, I think it should be done. But that is only my opinion. I have a few virtuals that I've sponsored myself.

Steve Bukosky N9BGH

Waukesha Wisconsin

January 6, 2003

Like any other sort of cache, if it is done well, it's a positive addition to geocaching (IMHO). I know there is significant opposition to virtuals (and locationlesses) but I enjoy doing them, if there is something about it that interests me.

In fact, I just submitted an eight-stage virtual that will take people on a walk through the historic section of the city where I grew up. I think it's a good cache, and I think the local cachers will enjoy it...

Cache well, and see ya round the bend...

January 6, 2003

I agree that virtual caches can be very interesting. However, I only enjoy them if there is something there besides just the virtual cache. In other words, the virtual cache should be there to get me to visit the location because there is something of value there to see. In my opinion, the the location itself is the goal in this case, not the cache.

Perhaps others disagree, but that's my feeling.

dyslexics of the world, untie.

1.4k · January 6, 2003

I logged my first virtual cache this weekend. It was a very educational location that I never knew existed, so my vote is that as long as the virtual cache is educational/historic that it is very acceptable. Cheers!

Jeff

http://www.StarsFellOnAlabama.com

http://www.NotAChance.com

38.2k · January 6, 2003

A good virtual is fine. Unfortunatley people started placing virtuals at every memorial and roadside marker in existence. I think the admins have appropriately cracked down on silly virts.

Not to blow my own horn, but this, to me, is what a virtual cache should be about.

"Paternalism is the greatist despotism" - Emmanual Kant

1.4k · January 6, 2003

I'm pretty new to geocaching and logged my first Virtual last weekend. I've logged two more since then.

I like virtual caches -- it makes you think about places that you already know. Since I started searching for them on the site I've made a list of items to watch for (found a virtual today while looking for a regular cache).

Found out that you have to be quick though -- was planning to photograph one today but Pharmadude logged it last night

Although I enjoy the Virtual caches, they are not the same as finding a physical cache. I think they should be logged separately (much like Travel Bugs).

----

[This message was edited by Jomarac5 on January 06, 2003 at 08:40 PM.]

5k · January 6, 2003

I'm with most of the above posters...in part.

I've hunted for two virtual locations, and I will say that they were both very neat spots. Perfect for a cache. Too bad there wasn't a container.

Both places could have easily had a container hidden somewhere (as a matter of fact, one of them did... about 15 feet away )

I've just got two gripes about virtuals.

First, it seems to me that many (if not most) virtuals could probably have a physical container hidden somewhere, but folks just don't want to take the time.

Second, the absence of a container removes the essential cache part of geocache. One of my favorite parts of caching is to get to where my GPS says I'm close, and then I have to hunt around for a hiding spot. A virtual deprives me of that.

Jamie

24.7k · January 6, 2003

While wading through the snow then digging through it to find a traditional. I can honestly say that my opinion of virtuals went up a notch or two.

Wherever you go there you are.

January 6, 2003

At first I really thought they were lame, though they are starting to grow on me. I agree that learning something or finding something unique is imprtant. Virtuals that ask me to name something inane, like how many light fixtures are on the ceiling or when was the fire hydrant made are pretty dumb. I guess my biggest peave is that when I donwload a bunch of caches, I don't know which ones are virtuals, then I go hunting around to find something that isn't there! Once I can figure out a method to distinguish them from regular caches, I will be much happier.

elifish

1.4k · January 7, 2003

Realized that this post was a bit off topic in this discussion. I've moved it to the Locationless caches - Taking pics! discussion.

Don't want to get Markwelled

[This message was edited by Jomarac5 on January 07, 2003 at 09:34 AM.]

2.7k · January 7, 2003

Virtuals like CACHES can be bad or good. Of all the virtuals I have out there 20+, I believe some of them are a little lame, but that is what the learning curve is all about. If they take you to a place where you can learn something then they can be real enjoyable. Or in the winter they can give someone some GPS exercises since the mountains can be closed for several months.

They do have one major advantage over real caches, they require little or no maintenance. But that can be offset if the requirements must be checked and e-mailed back. So there is still some effort to keep them up and running.

Tahosa - Dweller of the Mountain Tops.

January 7, 2003

To me, I use them when I'm close in numbers to a rival to pump up my find count quickly.

---------------

Go! And don't be afraid to get a little wet!

2.6k · January 7, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:
Over the past few days I've taken good look at virtual caches and have made a few observations:

DIFFICULTY RATINGS:

The virtuals that I looked at had difficulty ratings between 1 to 5 stars. How could a virtual cache that http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=45257rate a difficulty of 3.5? Standing on a country road and pushing your finger on a button can't be THAT hard. One cache had a difficulty of 5 -- although this http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=18527 might require some investigative effort to locate, I don't think it rates up there with the more difficult and aptly rated http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=43752.

You're talking aboutLOCATIONLESS caches there. The scavanger hunt type. Virtuals are a little different.

The difficulty of taking a photo of a happy face on the side of a barn is finding one.

Locationless: Find an object described, take a photo etc etc.

Virtual: Go to these coordinates and answer the questions to prove you've been there.

george

Pedal until your legs cramp up and then pedal some more.

1.4k · January 7, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by georgeandmary:

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:
Over the past few days I've taken good look at virtual caches and have made a few observations:

You're talking aboutLOCATIONLESS caches there. The scavanger hunt type. Virtuals are a little different.

Thanks George. My error. Yes, there is indeed a difference. Please forgive my mistake.

I moved my post here.

1.6k · January 7, 2003

A virtual cache that gets me to go to a cool area that I would have missed is good. Whether or not its "true" to the sport is not important as this is a recreational sport, and the idea is to have fun.

The virts that are road side stands or that require some picyune trivia off of some visitors sign for a find are not good.

By appointment to the Court of HRM Queen Mikki I.

January 7, 2003

Not all are the same, but take this one I never had to get out of the truck, so OK the terrain is high but the diffuctly is right on , I hope ya ll have a change to try it its Toooooooooooooo Cool.........JOE

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=7140

January 7, 2003

Here in Southern England we are suffering a lot of flooding at present, so Virtual and Locationeless caches can give us the chance to get out and relax in the fresh air without the problem of wading through "Lakes"!

IMHO all different cache types are valid as long as they offer a challenge and an amount of research and skill.

Having said that I did a Locationless cache which involved pulling the car over to the side of the road and photographing a sign! I have not yet logged it as I am not sure it is in the real spirit of Geocaching.

I woke this morning and my boat was not rocking...for one horrid moment I thought I lived in a house!

1.4k · January 7, 2003

I agree with most of what has been posted already.

Like ANY cache, a well-done virtual should be in an interesting location, or have some unique feature to it that makes it interesting to hunt. I think virtuals are most appropriate in a location where a physical cache box would be impractical, such as in areas where they would be plundered almost immediately or where a physical box is forbidden or would arouse too much "9-11 phobia". I personally think virtuals are more appropriate in places like cemeteries than physical caches, where an ammo box might be considered "disrespectful". I'm actually in the process of looking at the virtuals I've set up in the past to see if there is a way to change them into either traditional caches or multi-caches.

I have to agree that too many "lame" virtuals are out there, but the same is true of other cache types, too. ANY cache should be well thought out and interesting or unique in some way.

1.2k · January 7, 2003

I'm like a lot of the others that have posted here, I like virtuals that are well done, or take me somewhere I would not have even known existed. On the other hand, if a traditional cache can be placed so that you wind up at the same place and get the same info, while also hunting a cache, then that is prefered.

The virtuals I have created have mostly been in areas where traditional caches are banned (can you say Yellowstone?, or Little Bighorn National Battlefield Monument?), or in parks where permission was not denied, but was expressed as, "We'd prefer you didn't...." so rather than a traditional cache I made a virtual so that others could come and see the site and get a "find" for it. As a military history buff most of mine can be found at battlefield sites and other places of military significance.

Lame virtuals consist of those that get you somewhere that is of interest to the cache owner only, like a hydrant in front of their house, etc... LOL, not that this is a BAD thing you understand....

As an aside,you can't just drive up the street to most of my traditional caches as well....(BEG)

"Trade up, trade even, or don't trade!!!" My philosophy of life.

January 7, 2003

There are lame real caches, and lame virtual caches.

To me, these traditional caches are getting lame:

"Big" caches: Random spot in woods, no particular redeeming value (beyond the wonderful value any forest provides) where I end up walking 2 miles to essentially no-where and finding the cache under some brush.

"Micro" caches: I tossed a 35mm film can in a half-acre of ivy and nettles! Go for it!!

"Virtual" caches: Hi! You are by the side of a road. The cornerstone of the rest stop indicates this rest stop was built in what year? Add that to the number of toilets in the latrine, and then count the number of nails holding up the roof, and e-mail us the answer.

The caches that take us to some place we haven't seen before, or cause us to appreiciate some aspect of the place, or teach us something fun, or involve a puzzle, or where the previous loggers indicate there was special pleasure in finding the cache - well, those are good caches.

Some great virtual caches we have visited:

The K-Leave Me Cache - this cache, for out-of-towners takes you to a very famous spot in San Francisco, recognizable to just about everyone.

Good Reverberations for just plain weirdness.

Zip Over to 95118 for bringing back a flood of memories with the object that is the 'target' of the cache.

2.7k · January 7, 2003

Virtual caches are cool if they take you to someplace neat. Sometimes an area just isn't suitable for hiding a cache. Just make sure that you have a good question for cachers to answer and one that can't be answered by looking up on the internet.

I did a cool virtual called Zi Iob, http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=5517, during the summer...a 15 mile, 4400 ft hike to a summit that has an unusual object on it. I had to go up there and identify it and email the cache owner.

On the other hand, there is a type of virtual that's Locationless....avoid this type!!!!

One could plant such a cache in Kentucky and a cacher in California could log it as a find if he/she finds the requested object in her area. I guess some like doing these, but they should be in a seperate count category like Benchmarking.

3.1k · January 8, 2003

I enjoy virtuals as well as any other form of cache. Well even more than a multi stage cache. I normally don't like them.

It's more difficult to get virtuals approved on this site these days. If it isn't "special" enough they'll turn it down. If it's in an area where a regular cache could be hidden they'll turn it down. What some are doing now is placing a micro cache not far away with only a log in it. So you get the info off the virtual and then find the micro and sign that. I guess I can live with that.

Til they change that too.

I hear voices.....and they don't like you!

January 8, 2003

Lazyboy & Mitey Mite wrote:

quote:
It's more difficult to get virtuals approved on this site these days. If it isn't "special" enough they'll turn it down. If it's in an area where a regular cache could be hidden they'll turn it down. What some are doing now is placing a micro cache not far away with only a log in it. So you get the info off the virtual and then find the micro and sign that. I guess I can live with that.

Well, what you say is correct, but done to counter complaints of a flood of lame virtuals. For the whole story, keep in mind what the posted guidelines are and what the approvers receive as submissions are all too often questionable. This is the text of the last virtual cache I reviewed, with only some non-relavent text removed to avoid embarrasment to the poster:

quote:
Go to these coordinates, look around and obtain the name of "The Big Kahuna". The name is 5 letters long. In order to get credit, you must e-mail me with the name you see there. Please do not reveal this name in your cache report.

Well, that may be the greatest gift to the geocaching world, but perhaps not.

That geocacher, and those who post similarly questionable caches get the following e-mail from me:

quote:
Hi,

Your virtual cache was archived to prevent blocking of the approval queue. Frankly there was insufficient information on your virtual cache submission to ensure that it fits within the parameters described here,

http://www.geocaching.com/articles/requirements.asp

The location should be a unique and compelling one of the sort that you'd find in a coffee table book., and there has to be some way to verify that the finder found it. Generally virtual caches are placed in locations where a traditional cache would not be allowed or would be inappropriate, since the virtual prevents a later physical cache being placed within a .1 mile radius of that spot.

Often a micro cache can be readily placed at or near the same spot submitted as a virtual cache. That is usually the case unless the spot is in the middle of a busy city. That would not only bring people to your special spot but give them a physical cache to find as well.

Please don't hesitate to respond with an explanation if it's been misjudged or after you've amended it to meet the guidelines. Please reference the cache name or number when you reply via e-mail to "erik88L-R".

Thanks for your understanding,

erik - geocaching.com admin

Well, most people do not reply at all and their cache remains archived. I would assume that they agreed after reading the guidelines for virtual caches that their's did not live up to them.

Those who bother to reply with an elaboration nearly always have their virtual cache posted as soon as the e-mail is read. I say "nearly always" because with some "explanations" one is left feeling that if half as much effort were put into creating the cache as defending it the cache would have been posted to begin with. You can defend creating a virtual cache out of a bench on a trail in the woods 'till you're blue in the face and I'll still tell you either put a micro cache under it or find a spot that's unique enough to meet the guidelines! Some people amend the cache to better fit the guidelines, but in all cases the approvers try to work with those who submit caches. We want to have good caches to hunt as much as anyone.

Cache on! (both physical and virtual)

erik - geocaching admin lackey

[This message was edited by ~erik~ on January 08, 2003 at 03:33 PM.]

[This message was edited by ~erik~ on January 08, 2003 at 03:34 PM.]

January 8, 2003

When I first started geocaching, I didn't care for virtuals, but after watching my friend's cache plundered and a large section of local forest closed to geocaching, I've changed my mind. I still enjoy the thrill of finding an ammo can, but a well thought out virtual can be just as enjoyable (they are also easier to maintain).

There's no present. There's only the immediate future and the recent past.

January 8, 2003

I don't see a lot of difference between going to a virtual cache and going to a benchmark. Some are interesting and sort of unique and some are just run-of-the-mill stuff. But then the same is true of actual caches.

$1000 Bill

Virtual Caches...Good or Bad?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation