Jump to content

When does a cache hide cross over from Challenging to Mean?


SombreHippie
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

Aside from depending on who's finding it, at what point do you believe the general consensus would be that the cache is just plain mean instead of just very challenging?

 

Is there a breaking point, or do you believe that every challenge must be conquered?

 

A great serial killer once said, "Beauty is only skin deep. Trust me, I've looked..."

Link to comment

It's all a matter of the description...

If you honestly characterize what the searcher should expect, and you don't do anything deliberately misleading (like wrong coords), then I think making it extremely callenging is fair play. Just warn people that it's going to be extremely difficult, and why (rugged terrain, well hidden, unexpected placement, etc)

 

"I'm not Responsible... just ask my wife, She'll confirm it"

Link to comment

They can be related to eachother in lots of ways. Everyones opinions varies on cache difficulty...

 

I guess if the owner was kinda short and lazy about the cache description, then that could maybe kinda possibly sorta be considered a 'mean' cache hide.

 

There's not really a rule to this though.

 

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

Garmin V

Using Opera 7.1

Link to comment

I have a cache that's been called mean by a few, in a good natured sort of way. It IS unusual for this area, so people understandibly had a hard time.

 

What I call mean is a film canister hidden deep in the forest, not near any place that the average geocache would check (meaning the usual suspects...trunks, crevices, hollows of trees, et. al.). This one was just plain mean.

 

"You can't make a man by standing a sheep on his hind legs. But by standing a flock of sheep in that position, you can make a crowd of men" - Max Beerbohm

Link to comment

There is one cache in particular that I consider mean. The owner kept changing its position and container during the first week making it impossible to find. I honestly believed the cache owner was playing mind games with the geocachers in our area. He even sent me a false clue. The only way any of us found it was by the behind the scenes e-mails cachers were passing around. Even though the cache hider has a lot of caches in our area, I have no desire to find any more of his. There are at least 2 other caches he has changed around after the initial cache listing. He kind of sucked the fun out of geocaching with his caches.

 

***********

 

Till a voice, as bad as Conscience, rang interminable changes

On one everlasting Whisper day and night repeated -- so:

"Something hidden. Go and find it. Go and look behind the Ranges --

"Something lost behind the Ranges. Lost and waiting for you. Go!"

 

Rudyard Kipling , The Explorer 1898

Link to comment

Mean is going into the woods and chucking a micro under a random bush, where there are ten thousand bushes all around it that look exactly alike, and there's enough tree cover to prevent better than 30-foot accuracy. Mean is saying "under a rock" in a field of rocks. Mean is putting a cache in a nondescript area with a hint like "coordinates are right on, just find it." Your coordinates are never going to be 100% accurate, and your finders are going to be dealing with 20-odd foot accuracy as well. Don't just tell them it's at the bleedin' coordinates.

 

Challenging and fun caches involve difficult-but-not-impossible puzzles, really good camouflage, novel hiding methods (I'll never forget to look up again), stuff like that. Putting a needle in a haystack just to be contrary isn't fun.

Link to comment

Agree with most everything that has been said. Challenging caches are great fun becuase in this area the hides seem to be in the same places (half hollow Redwoods). So anything but that is now a challenge since we've been conditioned to look there icon_wink.gif

 

Mean is hiding one in the middle of nowhere and jumping out from behind a bush yelling "surprise!" and scaring the hell outta someone icon_redface.gif

 

Now that I write that, it reminds me of a post Snoogans had on here a while ago about a cache in an old unused train tunnel that had a motion sensor that would trip a BRIGHT light and the sound of an approaching train (CD?). At first it may seem mean but I would laugh my @$$ off afterwards!

Link to comment

A surprise like that is fun. So are challenging caches like Roadrunners revenge:net serve, or D- Man both of which required multiple visits. A challenge is also fun if the owner will give you worthwhile clues if you are stumped. A challenge is fun as long as it has entertainment value to the cache finder (or cache attempter). A cache ceases to be fun when there is a high frustration level and the owner was not nice when he/she set the cache.

 

Till a voice, as bad as Conscience, rang interminable changes

On one everlasting Whisper day and night repeated -- so:

"Something hidden. Go and find it. Go and look behind the Ranges --

"Something lost behind the Ranges. Lost and waiting for you. Go!"

 

Rudyard Kipling , The Explorer 1898

Link to comment

when people begin my difficult multis, i usually warn them that they're in for a long frustrating ride. if they proceeed, it's their problem. if they find 'em, it's their triumph.

 

i even have a little congratulations song that i sing, but it's har d to translate in email, so some of the effect is lost.

 

i have never hunted a cache i thought was just plain mean. for all of the really hard ones, i was warned. some of them i can find, some i can't. i like people who are a little twisted.

 

-====)) -))))))))))))

presta schrader

Link to comment

Mean would imply intentional hazards or difficulties that are not forwarned in the cache page. Mean would be not being honest with the terrain and difficulty ratings. Mean could also mix with thoughtlessness, such as some of the useless clues people spend time deciphering which are of no help. Mean would also be ignoring DNF posts and not doing maintenance to assure all that things are located where they should be.

 

Steve Bukosky N9BGH

Waukesha Wisconsin

Link to comment

Hehehe...

 

I just had someone find a micro of mine yesterday on his second attempt.

 

I was feeling evil one day, and planted a micro out in the middle of a flat area that used to be a swamp, completely overgrown with weeds chest high.....MMwwaaaa-Hhaa-hhaaaa!!!

 

I was nice enough to attach a pic of what the container looks like, though...[icon_smile.gif]

 

My micro

 

Art

 

www.yankeetoys.org

www.BudBuilt.com

www.pirate4x4.com

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Renegade Knight:

...Mostly though I think mean caches have this for a clue. "Email me if you are having problems" Thanks, when I get back home which is 250 miles from here I'll be sure to do that!


 

RK, if you're talking about one of mine (the mileage seems right), there is a library with internet access right down the street from that cache icon_wink.gif .

Sure - no one has found it without extra email clues, but I really thought that would only be a problem for newbies (who I have tried to be very helpful towards) and cache thieves (who I doubt will bother contacting me by email). Anyhow, it's worked out well so far, and I've gotten some helpful feedback for fine-tuning (making it better, not meaner) that I otherwise would not have.

 

If it ain't my cache you're talking about, perhaps the owner has the same motivation.

 

"...clear as mud?"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by StayFloopy:

When I think about mean hides, microcaches hidden in rock fields come to mind. Strangely enough, I found those without too much trouble


 

CAUTION: OFF TOPIC

 

I read in another thread about a 'rule' that if a newly hidden 'traditional cache' (micro, regular, etc.) is within .1 mi. of a virtual cache, it will supercede the virtual. (The virtual will be archived.)

 

How come a similar 'rule' doesn't exist pertaining to tiny micro caches hidden in areas where a 'regular' or 'large' cache could easily be hidden? Seems hypocritical to me.

 

BACK ON TOPIC

 

The only cache I can ever recall considering "mean" was the very first "mystery" cache I found way-back-when. From the description, it was a normal cache, but it turned out to be a multi-cache. It was late at night, was raining, and I was wearing a Tux, so I was perturbed.

 

But looking back, there was nothing "mean" about it.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by StarshipTrooper:

...RK, if you're talking about one of mine (the mileage seems right), there is a library with internet access right down the street from that cache icon_wink.gif...If it ain't my cache you're talking about, perhaps the owner has the same motivation.

 

"...clear as mud?"


 

RCRacer actually. He has always been quick on his response to let me know the hint without an email. No handy library near any of his.

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...