Is anyone else a bit weary of locationless caches?

[+kbraband]

OK, I am finally getting to the point where I am tiring of locationless caches. I thought someone would surely have started a rant about them somewhere in the forums, but I did a search just now and didn't find anyone raising this issue... so here I go.

 

Up front I must I admit I have created two locationless caches myself: "Wisconsin's Rustic Roads" and "HOW low CAN YOU GO?" However, each of these requires a little research to come up with a place to visit and log a find. Along the way you are encouraged to learn something about that location and share it with your fellow on-line geocachers.

 

A week ago I also logged a few locationless caches: barber pole, stand-alone clock, and train depot. But as more and more of these appear, I'm starting to feel twangs of uneasyness about logging those.

 

Find an airport? Find a zoo? Find a tank? Find a red truck? I know, I know... no one is forcing me to hunt these types of caches. However, here's my concern: potential geocachers are going to look at the cache lists, see these types of no-brainer caches, and get the wrong idea of what geocaching is all about. At least what it SHOULD be about.

 

What about the rest of you? What do you think?

[+EraSeek]

What is it that defines caching? I take a coordinate, input it into the GPS, and my GPS leads me to a find. Coordinate> GPS> Find.

 

Not Find> Gps> Coordinate! These are nice to see, but they are just postcards... not Geocaching.

 

Yes, no brainers.

 

[+Salvelinus]

Personally, I think they have no part here. If I were king, they wouldn't. But I'm not king

 

The ones I've seen lately have been unbelievable. Find and airport, Find a covered bridge, Find a Mail Pouch barn. I pass all those things everyday on my way to work and I don't use my GPS'r to find them!

 

I see locationless caches as having 2 functions.

 

1. An easy way to get a cache out there

2. An easy way to bump your find totals

 

Virtual and web-cam caches are creeping in to my negative list lately as well. Simply because many that I recently see have some e-mail requirement for finding it. Like "e-mail me the answers" or "take your picture with your GPS for credit in finding the cache." Regular caches don't have this requirement, why should virtuals? What's to prevent anyone from logging a regular cache find that says "Found your cache today. Had a great time. Took nothing, left nothing" and never have been there?

 

I enjoy geocaching tremendously, but I will not log a virtual or a Locationless cache, with one exception. I did do the PA benchmark recovery cache because it seemed like a real hunt and the usual honor system for logging was maintained. I had also used the same find for the Indiana benchmark cache, but I have since deleted it. It just didn't feel right.

 

A web-cam cache just showed up as being closest to my home coordinates. Now I will never be able to have my first search page as all finds. To top it off, the placer of this cache is from Georgia, Not Pennsylvania!

 

I'm sure I'll get over it soon enough

Smoochnme

 

"Only when the last tree is cut,

and the last stream is polluted,

and the last fish is caught,

will we realize that you can't eat the money"

 

[This message was edited by smoochnme on May 01, 2002 at 09:46 PM.]

[+Salvelinus]

Personally, I think they have no part here. If I were king, they wouldn't. But I'm not king

 

The ones I've seen lately have been unbelievable. Find and airport, Find a covered bridge, Find a Mail Pouch barn. I pass all those things everyday on my way to work and I don't use my GPS'r to find them!

 

I see locationless caches as having 2 functions.

 

1. An easy way to get a cache out there

2. An easy way to bump your find totals

 

Virtual and web-cam caches are creeping in to my negative list lately as well. Simply because many that I recently see have some e-mail requirement for finding it. Like "e-mail me the answers" or "take your picture with your GPS for credit in finding the cache." Regular caches don't have this requirement, why should virtuals? What's to prevent anyone from logging a regular cache find that says "Found your cache today. Had a great time. Took nothing, left nothing" and never have been there?

 

I enjoy geocaching tremendously, but I will not log a virtual or a Locationless cache, with one exception. I did do the PA benchmark recovery cache because it seemed like a real hunt and the usual honor system for logging was maintained. I had also used the same find for the Indiana benchmark cache, but I have since deleted it. It just didn't feel right.

 

A web-cam cache just showed up as being closest to my home coordinates. Now I will never be able to have my first search page as all finds. To top it off, the placer of this cache is from Georgia, Not Pennsylvania!

 

I'm sure I'll get over it soon enough

Smoochnme

 

"Only when the last tree is cut,

and the last stream is polluted,

and the last fish is caught,

will we realize that you can't eat the money"

 

[This message was edited by smoochnme on May 01, 2002 at 09:46 PM.]

[+Ranz]

As much as I hate to be classified in any category, I guess I am a Geocaching fundamentalist. I have not logged locationless or virtual caches, and probably won't. If I head out with a location in the GPS, find the items listed at that location, and sign the log (If there is one), then I post a find.

 

From another perspective I can see where they could have a place in Geocaching. Example: I am lucky enough to have the physical ability to seek almost any cache posted. Not everyone can say that. Geocaching is a great sport and should not be limited to people who can hike, climb, swim, or whatever. These cache types allow physically challenged people to participate. While they are not for me, I wouldn't want to restrict Geocaching for anyone else.

 

Lets face it. There are not a lot of handicap friendly caches out there. Until we can come up with a better alternative that allows everyone to play, the locationless and the virtual caches help fill that void. I don't choose to seek them but I have no issues with those that do. Whatever their reason.

 

[+briansnat]

I really don't care for them. Most of them are pretty silly and unimaginative (Crusso's "Wheres In A Name" cache is a notable exception). But obviously a lot of people do like them. The way I look at it is if you don't like them, don't do them.

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken & Robin:

OK, I am finally getting to the point where I am tiring of locationless caches. I thought someone would surely have started a rant about them somewhere in the forums, but I did a search just now and didn't find anyone raising this issue... so here I go.

---

 

Obviously, it's locationless ... spread out among all the other threads.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken & Robin:

 

A week ago I also logged a few locationless caches: barber pole, stand-alone clock, and train depot. But as more and more of these appear, I'm starting to feel twangs of uneasyness about logging those.

---

 

I logged precisely two ... Crusso's 'Where's in a Name' cache and 'The 100,000 mile Rest Stop.' I've noticed a couple of others that are pretty clever, though I have no interest in them. But I feel that most locationless caches are just an easy way for people to log finds without expending much effort.

 

My opinion only. Do what you want. "No skin off my teeth," whatever that means.

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by smoochnme:

...A web-cam cache just showed up as being closest to my home coordinates. Now I will never be able to have my first search page as all finds. To top it off, the placer of this cache is from Georgia, Not Pennsylvania!

---

 

I gotta disagree on this one; I think webcam caches are fun, and two of the ones I've done (at the Jersey shore and in Times Square, NYC) were placed by someone in Sicily. Another one I enjoyed was in the Hamptons and was placed by a fellow from Jersey.

 

Your photo at the sight (taken by the webcam, usually mounted on a building) proves you were there. I like to bring a geocaching sign ... though sometimes the resolution of the cameras is too low to identify it. And at a couple of them, I expended more time trying to locate the camera then I've spent looking for many a traditional cache!

 

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on May 02, 2002 at 04:32 AM.]

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by smoochnme:

...A web-cam cache just showed up as being closest to my home coordinates. Now I will never be able to have my first search page as all finds. To top it off, the placer of this cache is from Georgia, Not Pennsylvania!

---

 

I gotta disagree on this one; I think webcam caches are fun, and two of the ones I've done (at the Jersey shore and in Times Square, NYC) were placed by someone in Sicily. Another one I enjoyed was in the Hamptons and was placed by a fellow from Jersey.

 

Your photo at the sight (taken by the webcam, usually mounted on a building) proves you were there. I like to bring a geocaching sign ... though sometimes the resolution of the cameras is too low to identify it. And at a couple of them, I expended more time trying to locate the camera then I've spent looking for many a traditional cache!

 

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on May 02, 2002 at 04:32 AM.]

[+Alan2]

I think they're fine. Some people will like them, some won't. Regardless, variations of the original game will continue to be allowed as long as they bring dues paying customers to this site.

 

Alan

[+M-D-M Explorations]

I feel the locationless caches are a great way to get the novice geo-cacher to build up more interest in the sport. As a novice myself, I am not physically able to do a lot of the bushwacking type caches, but I try. When I get too frustrated it is nice to know I can look at some of the more interesting locationless caches to boost my spirits and still remain a "player".

 

The best comment I like above is the person who states if you don't like them you don't have tolook for them.

[+orange]

I personally will not ever hunt a locationless cache. For me the game is to go to the same place that everyone else also visited and not a thousand different places that 1 person went to.

 

I have no problem with virtual or webcam caches because everyone is supposed to go to the same place.

 

However everyone must play by their own rules.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by smoochnme:

 

A web-cam cache just showed up as being closest to my home coordinates. Now I will never be able to have my first search page as all finds. To top it off, the placer of this cache is from Georgia, Not Pennsylvania!

 

---

 

I agree with your thoughts on this. I have seen another post where someone had asked to be able to mark caches that they do not intend to hunt as a "DO NOT SHOW" status. If this feature or a feature to only show the cache types you want to see, then you could still find the first 25 closest.

[+orange]

I personally will not ever hunt a locationless cache. For me the game is to go to the same place that everyone else also visited and not a thousand different places that 1 person went to.

 

I have no problem with virtual or webcam caches because everyone is supposed to go to the same place.

 

However everyone must play by their own rules.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by smoochnme:

 

A web-cam cache just showed up as being closest to my home coordinates. Now I will never be able to have my first search page as all finds. To top it off, the placer of this cache is from Georgia, Not Pennsylvania!

 

---

 

I agree with your thoughts on this. I have seen another post where someone had asked to be able to mark caches that they do not intend to hunt as a "DO NOT SHOW" status. If this feature or a feature to only show the cache types you want to see, then you could still find the first 25 closest.

[+Salvelinus]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

quote:

---

Originally posted by smoochnme:

...A web-cam cache just showed up as being closest to my home coordinates. Now I will never be able to have my first search page as all finds. To top it off, the placer of this cache is from Georgia, Not Pennsylvania!

---

 

I gotta disagree on this one; I think webcam caches are fun, and two of the ones I've done (at the Jersey shore and in Times Square, NYC) were placed by someone in Sicily. Another one I enjoyed was in the Hamptons and was placed by a fellow from Jersey.

 

Your photo at the sight (taken by the webcam, usually mounted on a building) proves you were there. I like to bring a geocaching sign ... though sometimes the resolution of the cameras is too low to identify it. And at a couple of them, I expended more time trying to locate the camera then I've spent looking for many a traditional cache!

 

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on May 02, 2002 at 04:32 AM.]

---

 

BassoonPilot:

 

That part of my post was more like fun bickering. Different types of caches can attract all types of people. Overall, that's probably a good enough reason to keep them all. I just would rather be walking a trail in the woods looking for a plastic container than having my picture taken with pig statues!

 

By the way, here is the

Link to that cache if your interested. The Tavern restaurant mentioned in the clue is a great place to eat!

 

Smoochnme

 

"Only when the last tree is cut,

and the last stream is polluted,

and the last fish is caught,

will we realize that you can't eat the money"

[+Salvelinus]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

quote:

---

Originally posted by smoochnme:

...A web-cam cache just showed up as being closest to my home coordinates. Now I will never be able to have my first search page as all finds. To top it off, the placer of this cache is from Georgia, Not Pennsylvania!

---

 

I gotta disagree on this one; I think webcam caches are fun, and two of the ones I've done (at the Jersey shore and in Times Square, NYC) were placed by someone in Sicily. Another one I enjoyed was in the Hamptons and was placed by a fellow from Jersey.

 

Your photo at the sight (taken by the webcam, usually mounted on a building) proves you were there. I like to bring a geocaching sign ... though sometimes the resolution of the cameras is too low to identify it. And at a couple of them, I expended more time trying to locate the camera then I've spent looking for many a traditional cache!

 

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on May 02, 2002 at 04:32 AM.]

---

 

BassoonPilot:

 

That part of my post was more like fun bickering. Different types of caches can attract all types of people. Overall, that's probably a good enough reason to keep them all. I just would rather be walking a trail in the woods looking for a plastic container than having my picture taken with pig statues!

 

By the way, here is the

Link to that cache if your interested. The Tavern restaurant mentioned in the clue is a great place to eat!

 

Smoochnme

 

"Only when the last tree is cut,

and the last stream is polluted,

and the last fish is caught,

will we realize that you can't eat the money"

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan2:

I think they're fine. Some people will like them, some won't. Regardless, variations of the original game will continue to be allowed as long as they bring dues paying customers to this site.

 

Alan

---

 

No, NO, Alan ... locationless caches, like 98.5% of the stuff on the site, are ENTIRELY FREE for EVERYONE ("dues paying customers" and cheapskates alike) to enjoy ...

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan2:

I think they're fine. Some people will like them, some won't. Regardless, variations of the original game will continue to be allowed as long as they bring dues paying customers to this site.

 

Alan

---

 

No, NO, Alan ... locationless caches, like 98.5% of the stuff on the site, are ENTIRELY FREE for EVERYONE ("dues paying customers" and cheapskates alike) to enjoy ...

[+Clan Ferguson]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSki and Dogma:

I feel the locationless caches are a great way to get the novice geo-cacher to build up more interest in the sport.

---

 

IMHO they do not help newbies. because the newbie still hasn't found what should be the meat and potatoes of this "sport" and that is finding the BOX.

 

I do not agree with locationless caches and there for will not hunt them. I am becomeing miffed by Virtuals because in my mind it is nothing more then a message that says "Hey go stand over there will ya!!"

 

I feel that to be true geocaching (see rant) you have to be able to bring back something physical. I have only hunted one Virtual and we have yet to log it because it requires you to check in at build that at the time of the hunt was locked.

 

My only execption to this (and only if I got the itch real bad) is Webcams at least I have a specilized photo of the find.

 

So my vote on Virtuals/Locationless caches is Don't like em. Don't Hunt Em.

 

James

"Big Dog"

-Clan Ferguson

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clan Ferguson:

 

... I feel that to be true geocaching you have to be able to bring back something physical...

---

 

I have a tendency to bring home stickers embedded in my body. Oh, and mud encrusted clothes, sometimes with a tick or two I missed. That always thrills the Mrs. ("You're not coming into this house looking like THAT!!!") Oh yes, and the wet hiking boots ... I currently have 4 pair drying out downstairs.

[+sbell111]

Just to give a voice to the other side of the argument, I kinda like virtuals.

 

Lately, the middle Tennessee area has been so overwhelmed with micro caches scattered about like so many easter eggs that virtuals are like a holiday. I like the fact that locationless virtuals do not come up in my regular searches. This allows me to go after locationless virtuals and not be bothered by non-virtuals, or go after 'real' caches and not have locationless virts cluttering the place up.

 

We have a good way to segregate locationless from 'real' caches, so I have no problem with either. The only caches that I truly despise are those that are truly lame.

 

I have three caches out there right now: achallenging regular cache (in ammo box), a virtual cache, and a locationless cache. I realize that the chances of anyone being jazzed by all three of the is unlikely, but I think they all have merit.

 

Now if we could do something about the 'easter egg' micros...

[Zuckerruebensirup]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

 

No, NO, Alan ... locationless caches, like 98.5% of the stuff on the site, are __ENTIRELY FREE__ for __EVERYONE__ ("dues paying customers" and cheapskates alike) to enjoy ...

---

 

We're not allowed to list a locationless cache as an MOC? That seems odd.

 

-------

"I may be slow, but at least I'm sweet!"

[Zuckerruebensirup]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

 

No, NO, Alan ... locationless caches, like 98.5% of the stuff on the site, are __ENTIRELY FREE__ for __EVERYONE__ ("dues paying customers" and cheapskates alike) to enjoy ...

---

 

We're not allowed to list a locationless cache as an MOC? That seems odd.

 

-------

"I may be slow, but at least I'm sweet!"

[+worldtraveler]

quote:

---

Originally posted by EraSeek:

What is it that defines caching? I take a coordinate, input it into the GPS, and my GPS leads me to a find. Coordinate> GPS> Find.

 

Not Find> Gps> Coordinate! These are nice to see, but they are just postcards... not Geocaching.

---

 

Thanks, EraSeek, for stating so eloquently what I've also tried to express several times in other posts. It is faithful to the “official” definition posted here, which reads, in part, “What is Geocaching? ...The basic idea is to have individuals and organizations set up caches all over the world and share the locations of these caches on the internet. GPS users can then use the location coordinates to find the caches.” (emphasis mine)

 

By this definition, most virtual caches qualify and most “locationless” caches don't. I don't agree with the “anything goes; don't hunt 'em if you don't like 'em” philosophy because I think there is a fundamental difference between creatively “expanding” the sport and “diluting” the sport. Innovative applications within the confines of this definition serve to expand; applications, no matter how innovative, that ignore the definition serve to dilute. They don't add to the identity of geocaching; they dissolve it.

 

Having said all that, which is obviously just my opinion, I don't fault the folks who have created these caches; I have to assume they didn't know or just hadn't considered the definition. What surprises and saddens me is that the caches not meeting the definition of “geocache” were initially approved and then permitted to remain.

 

I, for one, would like to see my investments (subscription fees & geocache products purchases) used to support GEOCACHING, not some mutant metamorphism thereof.

 

Worldtraveler

[+worldtraveler]

quote:

---

Originally posted by EraSeek:

What is it that defines caching? I take a coordinate, input it into the GPS, and my GPS leads me to a find. Coordinate> GPS> Find.

 

Not Find> Gps> Coordinate! These are nice to see, but they are just postcards... not Geocaching.

---

 

Thanks, EraSeek, for stating so eloquently what I've also tried to express several times in other posts. It is faithful to the “official” definition posted here, which reads, in part, “What is Geocaching? ...The basic idea is to have individuals and organizations set up caches all over the world and share the locations of these caches on the internet. GPS users can then use the location coordinates to find the caches.” (emphasis mine)

 

By this definition, most virtual caches qualify and most “locationless” caches don't. I don't agree with the “anything goes; don't hunt 'em if you don't like 'em” philosophy because I think there is a fundamental difference between creatively “expanding” the sport and “diluting” the sport. Innovative applications within the confines of this definition serve to expand; applications, no matter how innovative, that ignore the definition serve to dilute. They don't add to the identity of geocaching; they dissolve it.

 

Having said all that, which is obviously just my opinion, I don't fault the folks who have created these caches; I have to assume they didn't know or just hadn't considered the definition. What surprises and saddens me is that the caches not meeting the definition of “geocache” were initially approved and then permitted to remain.

 

I, for one, would like to see my investments (subscription fees & geocache products purchases) used to support GEOCACHING, not some mutant metamorphism thereof.

 

Worldtraveler

[+Web-ling]

I agree that the locationless caches are getting...well, boring. I've logged several, and I've placed A Pair of Quintuplets, Colorado Fourteeners, and Timing is Everything. I've made an effort to make mine unique in some way. Both Quintuplets and Timing require the cacher to go to coordinates. Fourteeners provides coordinates, but could easily be done without them - but what a view!

 

The problem I'm having with most of the locationless caches is they're just plain unimaginative. Sort of like putting a regular cache in a ditch on the side of the interstate. C'mon, if you're going to place a cache, whether traditional, virtual, or locationless, let's put some thought into it, and at least make it interesting!

 

I'm just waiting for the "find a tennis shoe left in the woods, and post the coordinates" cache...

 

 

[This message was edited by Web-ling on May 02, 2002 at 03:56 PM.]

[+My Blue Heaven]

When I first came across a few of the locationless caches I thought that they were ok, and even logged a few. I have to admit that I have gotten pretty bored with them, pretty fast.

 

Part of what I enjoy about geocaching is that it takes me to the exact same place as the person who hid the cache, as well as everyone else who has found the cache. One of the more memorable finds we did here in Southern Arizona was a cache where the cache owners put copies of the pictures from the pervious camera into the cache. It was a lot of fun sitting at the cache location and looking at the pictures of other cache hunters that were sitting in the exact same place during different times of the year.

 

I don't mind virtual caches as most of the ones that I have found are in very interesting places, and were places that I probably would not have known about before.

 

I guess that there is a place for the locationless caches, but they just don't interest me any longer.

[+Markwell]

Find an airport? Sounds a little too easy.

 

Now that the locationless have moved to their own area, I'm finding that I don't pay too much attention to them. I'll admit, I logged two - The first one was one that could be combined with another cache hunt I did, so I expended no further effort than to take the picture and read the GPS. The other one intrigued me a little more.

 

Unless it combines with an already existing cache, I probably won't find anymore of these. I would have thought Darwinism would have made these extinct long ago.

 

Lest this statement be confused with virtual caches: I've seen plenty of outstanding and just plain interesting virtual caches.

 

Markwell

My Geocaching Page

[+Markwell]

Wow. Is that an echo I hear?

 

Markwell

My Geocaching Page

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zuckerruebensirup:

 

We're not allowed to list a locationless cache as an MOC? That seems odd.

---

 

I don't know. Give it a try, and see what happens.

[+erik88l-r]

I fear that the locationless caches hurt the credibility of the sport.

 

I deal with officials as I try to get permission to place caches in parks. I wonder if they can look upon my request seriously when they see some of the stuff that's posted now.

 

Now instead of promoting cache-in-trash out I fear that we're promoting trash. Period.

 

Do we want to read newspaper articles about local geocachers going for this stuff, or for traditional caches. Think about what it does to our sport. Just my humble opinion

[Syn]

I plan on never participating in locationless cache's.

 

I put in another thread at one time about a members only locationless cache. (Nuff said about that)

 

I see mixed reviews from people that are for them and against them.

 

I consider them to be the same as level 5 cache's that require scuba diving or fractals tree hugger cache. I wont climb a dang tree to get a cache and I wont scuba dive to get one, so I choose to just not participate in those cache's.

 

When I get every cache within a hundred miles of me, then I might think about locationless caches then.

 

waynepdx

[+carivercpl]

Is not the idea behind geocaching to HIDE an object. Why send them to a point???This makes no sense and i agree they should not be posted.

[+carivercpl]

Is not the idea behind geocaching to HIDE an object. Why send them to a point???This makes no sense and i agree they should not be posted.

[+pizzachef]

Sometimes you come across an area that has a magnificent view, or some really interesting hostory, and you really want to share it with other people. Sometimes these places are "delicate" in that you can't just hide a box in a tree...it may be private propoprty that allows people to walk in and experience being there. It may be a wildlife preservation, or an old plantation house, or any number or things where hiding a box wouldn't be appropriate. This is what virtual caches are for...a spot where a geocache SHOULD be, but SHOULDN'T be as well. Virts do not discourage me and shouldn't discourage you because haven't we all said it's the "getting there" that's most of the fun?

I'm not saying there aren't lame virtuals out there, but I can't let those keep me from seeking the really magnificient ones.

 

As for locationless caches...eh. I tried them...I don't want to outlaw them, but they're not really for me.

-pizzachef

[+kbraband]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Web-ling:

 

The problem I'm having with most of the locationless caches is they're just plain unimaginative. Sort of like putting a regular cache in a ditch on the side of the interstate. C'mon, if you're going to place a cache, whether traditional, virtual, or locationless, let's put some thought into it, and at least make it interesting!

---

 

Ah, that's it! Thanks, Web-ling! You have put your finger on and defined for me why I have a nagging feeling about some (not all) locationless caches. Some are just plain unimaginative and not worthy of geocaching, while others are quite cool. Thanks to all who have replied here so far to my original post. Right now I'm think I will continue to hunt an occassional locationless cache -- but only when I like the way it's put together, the thought that went into creating it, and the satisfaction I can gain out of hunting it, other than just another find. In other words, I may try to find the high point in my state, but I ain't gonna chase after American flags, water towers, and airports. After all, how hard are THOSE to find?

[+SamDeG]

I think Eraseek was right. A cache is really something where the process should be

 

1. Get coordinates, 2.go to coordinates using GPS 3. find something.

 

This allows for virtual caches, though I personally enjoy actually finding things a lot more than just seeing the site. That said, I think that if people want to place and claim locationless caches, it is their business, live and let live.

 

It's an inside joke []

[+SamDeG]

I think Eraseek was right. A cache is really something where the process should be

 

1. Get coordinates, 2.go to coordinates using GPS 3. find something.

 

This allows for virtual caches, though I personally enjoy actually finding things a lot more than just seeing the site. That said, I think that if people want to place and claim locationless caches, it is their business, live and let live.

 

It's an inside joke []

[+Alan2]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan2:

I think they're fine. Some people will like them, some won't. Regardless, variations of the original game will continue to be allowed as long as they bring dues paying customers to this site.

 

Alan

---

 

No, NO, Alan ... locationless caches, like 98.5% of the stuff on the site, are __ENTIRELY FREE__ for __EVERYONE__ ("dues paying customers" and cheapskates alike) to enjoy ...

---

 

Except for two things. Cheapskates interested in locationless caches and virtuals may go big time and start paying for MOC's. Also, you're assuming that this site will remain forever free. Hmmm.

 

Alan

[+Alan2]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan2:

I think they're fine. Some people will like them, some won't. Regardless, variations of the original game will continue to be allowed as long as they bring dues paying customers to this site.

 

Alan

---

 

No, NO, Alan ... locationless caches, like 98.5% of the stuff on the site, are __ENTIRELY FREE__ for __EVERYONE__ ("dues paying customers" and cheapskates alike) to enjoy ...

---

 

Except for two things. Cheapskates interested in locationless caches and virtuals may go big time and start paying for MOC's. Also, you're assuming that this site will remain forever free. Hmmm.

 

Alan

[gm100guy]

http://opentopic.Groundspeak.com/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1750973553&f=6770936793&m=8950973744

 

See this post

 

gm100guy

http://members.rogers.com/gm100guy/cachepage.htm

[gm100guy]

http://opentopic.Groundspeak.com/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1750973553&f=5280962783&m=7680973744

 

gm100guy

http://members.rogers.com/gm100guy/cachepage.htm

[+infosponge]

Some of the locationless caches are pretty challenging. Product of Parts (my own), Palindromes, etc...where you have to find a location that matches a formula or property and get to it. With Palindromes, I spent quite a bit of time trying out locations with ExpertGPS and then actually getting out in the field to check out 4 or 5 promising ones before I was able to log it. It was a lot more fun and satisfying than some of the drive-by caches that people have placed.

I was working on a new "scavenger hunt" kind of cache, but after reading the other postings in this forum, I guess I'll refrain. I'll hunt 'em, but I won't contribute to the noise level by posting any.

[+infosponge]

Some of the locationless caches are pretty challenging. Product of Parts (my own), Palindromes, etc...where you have to find a location that matches a formula or property and get to it. With Palindromes, I spent quite a bit of time trying out locations with ExpertGPS and then actually getting out in the field to check out 4 or 5 promising ones before I was able to log it. It was a lot more fun and satisfying than some of the drive-by caches that people have placed.

I was working on a new "scavenger hunt" kind of cache, but after reading the other postings in this forum, I guess I'll refrain. I'll hunt 'em, but I won't contribute to the noise level by posting any.

[ponyboy93]

I don't have to much trouble with them as long as they have their own separate page.

 

I think the virtual and locationless total finds should be separate from the real geocache finds.

 

ponyboy

[+Crusso]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrianSnat:

I really don't care for them. Most of them are pretty silly and unimaginative (Crusso's "Wheres In A Name" cache is a notable exception).

---

 

Whew.... guess I squeeked by on that one!

 

I thought long & hard before I posted my locationless cache & it's not exactly a cinch to do! (although I have been shocked at the number of logs it's gotten!) I didn't want it to be the "find an airport" type & I feel that it is unique & challenging. At the very least a locationless cache should be as hard if not harder than finding a regular cache.

[+Crusso]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrianSnat:

I really don't care for them. Most of them are pretty silly and unimaginative (Crusso's "Wheres In A Name" cache is a notable exception).

---

 

Whew.... guess I squeeked by on that one!

 

I thought long & hard before I posted my locationless cache & it's not exactly a cinch to do! (although I have been shocked at the number of logs it's gotten!) I didn't want it to be the "find an airport" type & I feel that it is unique & challenging. At the very least a locationless cache should be as hard if not harder than finding a regular cache.

[+GatoRx]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Web-ling:

 

The problem I'm having with most of the locationless caches is they're just plain unimaginative. Sort of like putting a regular cache in a ditch on the side of the interstate. C'mon, if you're going to place a cache, whether traditional, virtual, or locationless, let's put some thought into it, and at least make it interesting!

 

---

I have to agree with Web-ling on this one. I did several in one weekend, and while some were interesting, others were kinda boring, and I didn't really know what to put in the log other than the required info. If at some point in the future I'm really bored, and have found all the caches in my area, I may have to consider taking a couple of pictures at the airport, or some of the big American flag at the car dealership, but I'm hoping it won't come to that.

 

The locationless caches I did enjoy tended to be those that either required some research, or were of some value to me. Through these, I learned about the very beginning of my city; a local church that has quite a history to it; the fact that a Super Fund site is in my own neighborhood; and I found a street sign with my name on it. I actually learned something from these locationlesses, and also have a pic of a street that's "named" after me.

 

While these may not be "pure" geocaches, they're certainly an interesting off-shoot, and I'd like to see the more creative/imaginative caches continue.

 

[+JoeyBob]

I agree that some of the locationless caches are not as challenging as "physical" caches. Some of them are fun, the historical types that actually require some research are interesting, and you learn a little about where you are caching. My youngest child has motor skill delays, and has difficulty tramping through the woods for longer distances. He absolutely loves to do some of these locationless type caches while his big brother is in school! This type of cache lets us spend some "quality time", and he is more interested in Geocaching than he used to be. As his ability to participate in more physically demanding caches increases, he is more likely to remain interested. His older brother loves ANY type of cache, and will tear through the woods with the best of them. I hope this will show a little more perspective that different types of caches may serve different cachers, not everyone has the same opportunities or abilities.

[+JoeyBob]

I agree that some of the locationless caches are not as challenging as "physical" caches. Some of them are fun, the historical types that actually require some research are interesting, and you learn a little about where you are caching. My youngest child has motor skill delays, and has difficulty tramping through the woods for longer distances. He absolutely loves to do some of these locationless type caches while his big brother is in school! This type of cache lets us spend some "quality time", and he is more interested in Geocaching than he used to be. As his ability to participate in more physically demanding caches increases, he is more likely to remain interested. His older brother loves ANY type of cache, and will tear through the woods with the best of them. I hope this will show a little more perspective that different types of caches may serve different cachers, not everyone has the same opportunities or abilities.

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan2:

 

Except for two things. Cheapskates interested in locationless caches and virtuals may go big time and start paying for MOC's. Also, you're assuming that this site will remain forever free. Hmmm.

 

Alan

---

 

Well, I suppose one can just sit around letting life slip away, worrying about what "the other guy is getting," and look for negative aspects of everything. Life's short enough. I think I'll go geocaching.