Virtuals

[+Otter and Lemur]

I find that after some initial fuming, I've come to agree with the restrictions on virtual caches. I went and had a look at the virtual caches online in the area I grew up, and I quickly realized that without traveling there and without much special knowledge, had I been so inclined I could probably have satisfied the claiming requirements for those caches in about five minutes on Google.

 

Most asked a question about major landmarks that could be quickly identified simply by reading the cache description and looking on a map and going "ah, right, they're referring to the X monument"... and a matter of minutes later there was a page found via Google describing the X monument in plenty of detail. In at least one case the answer was actually basically given away in the cache description itself.

 

I know that theoretically people are cheating themselves out of the trip to see the location themselves when they get all stats-oriented and such. But on the other hand, all those wank-off virtual caches I see out there set a bad example for newbies, who assume that they likewise don't have to put any meaningful effort into setting up their caches.

 

-- Jay

[+Renegade Knight]

It's ok, tell us how you REALLY feel.

 

I'm looking forward to your post on benchmarks.

[pdumas]

sure

[+Breaktrack]

Apples and oranges.

 

But I digress.....

 

So it's okay to have "wank-off" traditional caches that set a bad example for newbies, but not "wank-off" virtuals.

 

I get it now.

 

"Afghanistan was a battle. Iraq was a battle. The war goes on."

[+Otter and Lemur]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Breaktrack:

So it's okay to have "wank-off" traditional caches that set a bad example for newbies, but not "wank-off" virtuals.

---

 

Locally, it seems that for a while new users who wanted to get in on the whole cache-planting phenomenon would simply look for a convenient roadside marker and place a virtual. Actually finding a container and putting some sort of trade loot inside seems to have been too arduous an endeavour for them. I gave up searching for local virtuals after I could, and did, claim them without actually going to them, based purely on being able to look up the answers to whatever questions they asked on Google.

 

I was a little frustrated to see that the same thing is the case elsewhere in the world as well; for every interesting virtual I've seen listed on the site, I've now come across nine pointless virtuals that I'm sure I could solve without leaving my desk.

 

I characterized these as "wank-off" because there seems to be no point whatsoever to them: they don't involve an interesting hike, they don't involve an interesting marker, they don't involve an interesting anything.

 

-- Jay

[+Otter and Lemur]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Renegade Knight:

I'm looking forward to your post on benchmarks.

---

 

I have nothing whatsoever against benchmarks. They involve getting up and out of one's chair and going out and using one's GPSr and finding something. I've located a benchmark atop the highest point in Vermont, for example, and found doing so to be interesting.

[ju66l3r]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Otter and Lemur:

I have nothing whatsoever against benchmarks. They involve getting up and out of one's chair and going out and using one's GPSr and finding something. I've located a benchmark atop the highest point in Vermont, for example, and found doing so to be interesting.

---

 

I have logged 2 benchmarks. The first one was the highest point in MA (Mt Greylock summit) and the other one was a cupola across the street from my friend's house. I decided to shoot it from the street to get the street signs in the picture but really, I could have shot it from his living room....in a chair.

 

This is just a reminder that each cache (virtual or otherwise) is what the finder (and to some degree, the hider) makes of it. We each have our own cup of tea and I find nearly all virtuals (especially if they involve historic markers) interesting. For some, they are trivial...for others, they are trivia.

 

This is why I don't see a need to never have virtuals ever again or anything like that. If they bother you because they intercolate with your regular cache search results, then you need to use a filter (e.g. Pocket Queries) or they need their own space (i.e. what's in the works from what the rumor mill has churned out).

 

For some it's not about finding *some* sort of trade loot and therefore it's not a matter of arduous-ness.

 

In fact, there's a virtual in Cambridge/Watertown, MA that doesn't even involve a keyword answer (grandfathered). But the view of downtown Boston from the top is amazing. For every virtual you only need to google, there are probably 10 puzzle-micro-multis with 5/5 ratings to go romp in the woods after.

 

I'm really not sure what the problem is here (other than the owner's consternation with the concept of leading someone somewhere that doesn't involve tupperware). You don't need to be led everywhere everyone else tells you to go.

 

--

 

http://healinghearts.freeservers.com/pandee.html

[+rooboy]

I believe that geocaching diversity is a good thing. If you don't like doing virtuals, then don't do them. For those that like virtuals, keep doing them. This is a win-win for both parties.

 

If gc becomes a no-vituals place (not too far off?), some other web site hopefully will address this need.

 

Ciao

RooBoy

[+smenzel]

Perhaps I'm just too new to Geocaching but ...

 

I like to look up Virtuals when I travel as they often add something to the tour I get of the city I'm visiting.

 

Sure, I could probably look up the answers for the Virtuals. I guess I could also just look up pictures of where I'm going and just stay home. But I don't.

[+Gorak]

I don't spend much time searching for virtuals or locationless caches, but I think they have their place, particularly for those in wheelchairs or live with some other disability. Whether a particular virtual is "lame" or not is fairly subjective and should not be a measure of their acceptability anymore than "lameness" is taken into consideration for traditional caches. Given the amount of bandwidth consumed in the forum over the subject of virtuals, I would guess that a LOT of people like them. As far as cheating goes, people cheat on traditional caches, as well. If someone wants to cheat they are only cheating themselves of the experience. It affects nobody but themselves.

 

If there is ever going to be an alternate cache listing site that can provide some realistic competition for GC, they would do well by building their userbase and marketshare on things like virtuals, locationless and moving caches that are now no longer part of TPTB's "vision" of what they want to force geocaching to be. However, its their site and they can do what they want, even if it alienates their paying customers and inadvertantly opens the door to more competition looking for a piece of the market.

 

____________

Gorak

 

I love frogs. They taste like chicken. Yum.

 

"Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been passionate, rebellious, and immature." --Tom Robbins

[+woof n lulu]

quote:

---

If gc becomes a no-vituals place (not too far off?), some other web site hopefully will address this need.

 

Ciao

RooBoy

---

 

AMEN...there are a lot baby boomers and disabled people out there that can't do the 4/4 5/5 anymore (heck even 3/3's), but have the finances for this sport. Virtuals are one way of participating in this sport without physical danger to the participant.

I hope this site takes into account the value of these members...and does not do away with the virtuals...it would be a real disappointment.

I myself have been more pleased with finding virtuals and the information they bring, then finding some of the caches full of junk. BUT, it all come down to the hunt..nothing more, nothing less. If you do a google search from your chair and claim the find, you are the only one that has to live with your conscience....

 

 

Aging is not for wimps !

Hey, my gray hair is just a disquise !

 

[This message was edited by woof & lulu on October 28, 2003 at 03:22 PM.]

[+Mopar]

I am SOOO tired of hearing the "we need virtuals for the disabled cachers!" argument. Have you bothered to ASK a disabled cacher for their thoughts? I have. They want to find a REAL cache, same as most of us. They don't need "geocaching" to drive up to a monument, any more then an able person does. How about instead of placing another monument virtual "for the disabled cachers", how about taking this as a challenge to hide good TRUE terrain 1 (wheelchair accessible) physical caches?

Let me start:

A Cache For A Queen, by Mopar

Lucas Lake Lovers, by Mickey225 and Mopar

(not at)Millville Airport, by Mickey225 and Mopar

Cedar Grove, RIP, by Mickey225 and Mopar

Banton Street, by Geo Ho and Mopar

George's Beautiful Land, by Geo Ho and Mopar

All the above are physical caches specifically intended to be able to be done by people in wheelchairs, scooters, or with other disabilities.

Obviously, not all are accessible to every handicapped person, but they are designed so that people of just about any handicap can participate in the hunt.

 

"This is gc.com, love it or leave it "

[+flask]

i did a virtual once where i could get ALL the answers from google, and i did before i left home. it was worth going to see. i did not bother to log it, even though (in a twist of my own peculiarity) i did go to the trouble of getting permission to do so.

 

i like virtuals. but then again, i like benchmarks. and no, benchmarking isn't always as easy as all that.

 

sometimes the fun of benchmarking is in meeting new people. ...on whose door you've just knocked. ...to try to explain why you want to go into their backyard.

 

and lemur, don't you have a JOB or something? ...run along, now.

 

quod est, est.

[+bthomas]

Having just cached through Vegas, I was surprised by the number of suburban virts. Sure the Vegas Strip has virts (one of then my own), but there are also 2 great micro placements successfully hidden within a block of the Blvd.

 

Was also happy to find a painted altoid on a classic virt subject-- the highway historical placard.

 

Though I loath multis (for their time sink and MIA mid-waypoints), my New Year's cache resolution is to convert some of my virts to offset micros.