Jump to content

is this a legitimate cache?


georapper
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

i posted a new cache called "Assimilation" as a microcache, 35mm film cannister with a 15 digit code that must be sent to a specific email address before being logged as a find. for the time being the cache is archived unless i find a majority that agree it is legitimate. the cache website is:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=56034

 

the cache has not been approved because there is no physical logbook nor trading involved. yes, i understand the need to keep trash to a minimum, but if i add a logbook, which i could easily do, i am adding to the potential trash of the area. a logbook adds trash.

 

another question i have is: how does one fit a logbook inside a 35mm film container listed as a microcache?

 

if the majority of the responses feel this is a legitimate cache, then it will be approved and listed on geocaching website, to the contrary, i will have to increase the potential trash in the area and add a logbook, no matter how small it may be to fit inside a 35mm film container.

 

what is your viewpoint?

 

as another side note, i was considering doing a multicache where i posted the location of the first cache at geocaching.com, then i would have the distance and bearing to another cache from the posted cache. this would require a compass as would be clearly identified in the description. i did not plan on putting a logbook on the intial cache but in the final cache of this multi-cache. would this be legitimate?

 

there was another cache called "seimograph station" that contained no log book but traded a one dollar bill, the real reason this cache existed was to get the distance to another cache in a multicache. it seems that trading is pretty arbitrary, in my proposed cache, i am proposing that a code be secured in order to count it as a find, the code has to be logged at the specified email address before a find can be counted.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by billybob2:

 

the cache has not been approved because there is no physical logbook nor trading involved. yes, i understand the need to keep trash to a minimum, but if i add a logbook, which i could easily do, i am adding to the potential trash of the area. a logbook adds trash.

 

another question i have is: how does one fit a logbook inside a 35mm film container listed as a microcache?

 


 

Put a log book in it. You can either do a strip of paper or you can construct a very small book. Ask Marky how he does it. Very nice small log books made out of rite-in-rain paper.

 

The caches that I've placed that are too small for log books I've listed as unknown type and not a traditional cache. But those really been too small for a log book. A film canister is not too small.

 

I don't put pencils in them though.

 

george

 

39570_500.jpg

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

Link to comment

I guess I fail to see where just adding a small scroll of paper inside the film canister would add any trash if the canister is hidden well. I would just state on the cache page that the cache hunters need to bring there own scribble stick.

 

And if you are worried about the canister being found and left as trash, why even put it there in the first place?

 

On the other hand, I have done several of those style caches without any logbook.

 

I would have no problem with the cache as stated if you can deal with the trash issue.

 

logscaler.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by billybob2:

if the majority of the responses feel this is a legitimate cache, then it will be approved and listed on geocaching website, to the contrary, i will have to increase the potential trash in the area and add a logbook, no matter how small it may be to fit inside a 35mm film container.

 

what is your viewpoint?

 


 

If I can fit a log sheet into a Bison Belt capsule (1/2 inch by 1 1/2 inch) then you surely can fit a log sheet into a 35mm film can.

 

The log is INSIDE the film can. it doesn't add to trash at all.

 

icon_geocachingwa.gif

Link to comment

Trading it optional. However, a physical cache needs to have a logbook of some sort. For multi-caches, usually only the last stage has a logbook. It sounds like the multi you're thinking about is an off-set. You'll want to put the bearing and distance in the first stage container, not on the cache page. Otherwise, it's a simple matter to do the calculatin at home, and go straight to stage 2.

 

And just FYI - it's pointless to post the URL to cache pages that haven't been approved yet. No one but the cache owner (and approvers) can view them at that stage. It used to be otherwise, back in the good ol' days.

 

3608_2800.gif

Link to comment

I don't see why this cache shouldn't be approved. It has a method of verification - like a virtual. The only snag I can see is listing it as a traditional. If it were listed as an unknown, I see no problem at all.

 

It's not that hard to make a micro logbook that will fit in a 35mm film canister. I have placed a couple out there myself.

 

As for trading, I trade in microcaches all the time. Coins, pins, erasers, stickers, and WheresGeorge$ all fit in a 35mm film canister. (Although perhaps not all at the same time.)

 

My suggestion would be to place a micro-logbook and a couple of micro-trinkets in the cache, and resubmit.

 

web-lingbutton.gif

Link to comment

I know of several micros that have a small amount of change inside rather than a logbook. You have to e-mail the owner with the amount of change to get credit.

 

However it is quite easy to get a logbook in a film canister. Just take a couple sheets of paper, cut them to the width of the canister and staple together.

 

Here is an example of one of my micro logs.

http://img.Groundspeak.com/cache/log/679473_200.jpg

 

The cache itself is slightly longer than a 35 mm

canister, so your sheets won't be quite as wide.

 

A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away. -Barry Goldwater

Link to comment

quote:
as another side note, i was considering doing a multicache where i posted the location of the first cache at geocaching.com, then i would have the distance and bearing to another cache from the posted cache. this would require a compass as would be clearly identified in the description. i did not plan on putting a logbook on the intial cache but in the final cache of this multi-cache. would this be legitimate?


 

It certainly would be legit. However putting a log book in the initial cache would be a mistake.

You're gonna get people logging FOUND ITS! for

finding the first stage if it has a log.

 

A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away. -Barry Goldwater

Link to comment

While I can see exceptions to not having a logbook in a physical cache, in my opinion this is not a candidate. It is easy enough to place a logbook in a film canister, and without one this pushes the definition of "cache". Caches like this are really more virtuals than anything, and I don't think that they meet the guidelines for virtuals.

Link to comment

I would certainly vote for approval. It seems that people are getting too worried about the 'rules' here. Personally, I think this is ideal. There is a positive method of verification, there is minimal enviromental impact, there is no requirement to lug a load of 'beads and other trade goods' so that you won't feel guilty over TNLN, and after all, isn't it the hunt that it's all about? Suggestion for Billybob... why not make a pole out of this, and if it's favorable, submit the results to the appropriate admin?

Link to comment

For a multi, I have used the offset technique. See Play It Safe!

for some ideas. I wanted to make sure visitors stopped at all points. The first container contains only bearing and distance pairs to get the seeker from place to place. A log book exists at the final cache only.

 

Why can't the container be a bit larger? That way, some items could be placed in it. If the placement of the cache requires a small container, then you can still add a log book. The code number is a good idea.

 

As far as the idea you ahve presented, I see no problem with it, as long as the location is worth a visit. There are plenty of junky caches in poor locations that have been approved (with a log book and McToys). A log book should not be the only method we can use to verify finds.

 

"Quality, not Quantity!"µ

Link to comment

Many micro caches don't contain a log book because there just isn't room.

 

I've seen the email the code type caches before and that is what verifies the find. This is the same thing a log book does. Log's are just more "Traditional" which is popular with the admins.

 

Steely-Eyed Cold solved the problem by cutting up some paper rolling it up and requesting date/name logs only. It wasn't a work of art but it was functional. Bring your own pencil is valid for a micro cache.

 

Wherever you go there you are.

Link to comment

These caches that require you to e-mail the owner are a bit annoying. Perhaps it's the gratuitous message on the cache page that usually goes like:

 

"When you fing the cache, answer the following fourteen questions about the cache, cache location, world history and Eastern European Literature. You must then take a picture of yourself, two witnesses, your GPS, your car, the cache page, a minor celebrity and a four-leaf clover. YOU MUST E-MAIL ME WITH THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS, THE PHOTOS AND A SIGNED AND NOTARIZED COPY OF THE CACHE PAGE THEN WAIT FIVE DAYS FOR ME TO BOTHER CHECKING MY E-MAIL BEFORE YOU LOG THE CACHE. Otherwise, I will be forced to delete your log, every other log or yours for all of my other caches then hunt you down and slap you silly."

 

Forget the stupid codes and e-mail. Just stick the log page in the cache and let folks sign it. If you toss and turn all night worrying that somehow, somewhere someone might fake a cache find, then archive the cache and get another hobby so that you'll sleep better.

 

My 100 mile cache count just went over 2000 so there's no lack of good, fun caches around here. I've decided to skip the caches that require unnecessary "proof" e-mails, filling out questionnaires or are accompanied by threats on the cache page.

 

...no offense intended, I got on a little roll there.

 

Mickey

Max Entropy

More than just a name, a lifestyle.

Link to comment

The most basic form of a traditional cache is a container and a logbook. A film cannister most certainly is able to hold a logbook. Just by not wanting to put one in just doesn't cut it with me. Sure there have been micros that have been approved that don't have a log, but IMHO they shouldn't have. And because there have been bad approvals in the past, does that mean a precedence has been made and all future bad approvals are now proper approvals? No.

 

What is described is far too much like a virtual than a traditional.

 

If you don't want to put a log in the cache, then I stand by the approver's decision to decline the cache placement.

 

Put in a logbook and resubmit.

 

CR

 

72057_2000.gif

Link to comment

First of all I agree that it should have a log. It's not difficult at all to cut 5-6 or more strips of paper to fit inside a film canister. If cachers use both sides of the sheets, there's room for plenty of logs. Those doing simply a name/date log can often put several logs on one side of a sheet. They can even be long enough to allow for more than just a name/date log. There's even room left after putting in a log book to allow for a couple of stubby pencils to be placed inside for cachers to use.

 

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:

I know of several micros that have a small amount of change inside rather than a logbook. You have to e-mail the owner with the amount of change to get credit.

 


I could see people playing with this kind of cache....count the change, then add or take a little....If I placed a cache like this, I wouldn't feel right unless I checked it often to make sure it had the proper amount of change in it. icon_smile.gif

 

I'm lost. I've gone to find myself. If I should happen to get back before I return, please ask me to wait.

Link to comment

A 15 digit code seems like alot of info to either try to remember or copy down without making a mistake. I've seen some with a single 5 or 6 letter word that you need to email but a number such as 398450258250157 seems a little too much - and I'm just assuming by digit you mean numerical. Just my opinion.

 

Eswau

Link to comment

i appreciate all of the responses and viewpoints. yes, there are some valid points made to include a log, i will include a log.

 

15 digit alphanumeric may seem long. i like long codes. hey, geocaching is a game, different people like different parts of the game. if there are parts of the game you don't like, don't play that part. do what interests you but most of all enjoy it and have fun.

 

there are some very creative and humerous people on this discussion board, it livens up my dead workday. most of all, what i like about caching is the chance to get out in nature, hike, backpack, 4-wheel, whatever, and feel the sun on my head and the real earth on my shoes, instead of the steel jungle that most of us inhabit during the day. that's what makes geocaching worth while.

 

geocaching really is geotrashing, we leave trash for someone else to find with a $200-$1000 piece of high technology to find trash. if our ancestors could see us now, hunting trash they would roll over in their graves. it really surprises me what people now days will do for excitement, but i'm as much a part of it as anyone else. caching is alot of fun and i plan on doing it for many years to come, god willing.

Link to comment

We have lots of those around here, small container with a number to email to the owner. These are lots of fun to hunt.

 

I think the key here is to list it as a unknown/suprise cache, rather than as a traditional cache.

 

Not having a log book to sign never bothered me when finding one of these mystery caches. Emailing the number to the hider seems like a good way to verify that the cache find was real.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by billybob2:

Criminal, what was the cache name so i can email the cache site to the person who approves it in southeast idaho for comparison?

 

thanks.


Can you do that? icon_confused.gif I thought you not allowed to point to other previous caches (like all the ones using an odd ammount of change) because they are given "grandfather" status...

 

And in any case why bother, just put a log SHEET in the film canister with a 'golf' pencil icon_wink.gif

 

waypoint_link.gif22008_1700.gif37_gp_logo88x31.jpg

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:

... However putting a log book in the initial cache would be a mistake.

You're gonna get people logging FOUND ITS! for

finding the first stage if it has a log.


 

I think (and I've seen it plenty of times) the type of person who logs a stage of a multi as a find would do it regardless of the presence of a logbook. I have done several multis with logs at each stage ... I'm not so sure if they are so the cache owner can verify that seekers did each stage, or to keep track of their progress on more involved multis.

Link to comment

I see that the cache has been approved. You did neglect to mention on the cache page that it is a microcache. Maybe you could change the wording to 'This cache is a micro-pod from the mothership' or something.

I usually hunt for caches while I'm on vacation. While I don't plan to visit Idaho anytime soon, if I was hunting your cache, I would be looking for a 'normal' sized container like an ammo box, not a film cannister. Maybe that doesn't matter to everyone, but I'd like just a bit more detail on the cache page.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Team GPSaxophone:

I see that the cache has been approved. You did neglect to mention on the cache page that it is a microcache. Maybe you could change the wording to 'This cache is a micro-pod from the mothership' or something.

I usually hunt for caches while I'm on vacation. While I don't plan to visit Idaho anytime soon, if I was hunting your cache, I would be looking for a 'normal' sized container like an ammo box, not a film cannister. Maybe that doesn't matter to everyone, but I'd like just a bit more detail on the cache page.


 

Don't forget "you can trade any items you wish" providing they fit in a 35mm film can....or did you give up on the micro idea and actually make it a regular size cache?

 

I'm lost. I've gone to find myself. If I should happen to get back before I return, please ask me to wait.

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...