Purposely posting bad coordinates

[+fizzymagic]

We have a local cacher who has recently begun placing caches with coordinates purposely a hundred or so feet off, saying so, and making cachers search a large area for the cache.

 

Apparently, this person thinks that posting bad coordinates is "creative." It seems to me that this method of hiding caches completely goes against the whole idea of geocaching.

 

What do people here think?

[+Mr. Snazz]

I've written out a very detailed and thoughtful response to your post, and left it in a container at:

 

121 N 44 W

 

...but seriously, aren't the "best possible" coords a requirement? And if not, shouldn't they be??

[+Team Shibby]

I would. I just wouldn't even search for them. How is it these caches get approved if they clearly state that the coords are wrong? I mean if it is a puzzle that must be solved to get the last leg of the coords, thats fine, but to clearly state that the coords are off is wrong.

 

Then again, maybe cachers in the area are looking for a more challenging hunt.

 

Kar

 

TEAM SHIBBY!!!!

 

Krs, Kar & Na

[+Bill D (wwh)]

Ok for the handful of people who don't use a GPSr. But otherwise, as Mr Snazz said, surely the best possible co-ords are a requirement.

 

Have any of these caches been found? If so, what do the finders' logs say?

 

Bill

[+Treasure Trackers]

I would have to agree with the other posters that "good" coordinates should be given.

 

If the hider wants to have an offset cache then just make it a standard offset cache.

 

"Damned Infernal Gizmo. My Kingdom for a Left-Handed Can Opener."

-- Mr. Burns, The Simpsons

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

That cacher would be off my list of caches to do.

 

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

[+Mopar]

Were these caches approved like this, or were they changed after the approval process?

Take 100ft of intentional error, add that to possible hider and finder error, and you have yourself a circle 300ft across to search for that cache. Too much chance of environmental damage for my liking.

 

Tae-Kwon-Leap is not a path to a door, but a road leading forever towards the horizon.

[Micqn]

The only time I have ever posted bogus coords was because even though I archived a cache, people kept going to it and putting themselves in the 'cross-hairs' of a farmer.

 

Nice Rack!

[+Nurse Dave]

I agree, don't find his caches anymore. There is a cacher around here getting known for just sloopy (inaccurate) coordinates and unnecessary bushwacking in parks and some people are avoid their caches now. The more and more people that do will eventally send a signal to people like this.

 

---Real men cache in shorts.

[iryshe]

Intentionally adding an error just for the heck of it detracts from the point of using a GPS in the first place.

 

Please send a note to the geocacher and ask them to put in proper coordinates. If this fails please contact us at contact@geocaching.com and we will address it.

 

Thanks for not linking to the cache or pointing to the specific user.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location™

[+SpongeRob]

I'm not sure I agree with unnecessary bushwacking. It makes sense that the poster would give a proper terrain rating, but I'm not sure that if the cache is rated correctly that you could say unnecessary bushwacking. I've hidden some caches where I expect few people to go. That includes some serious thorn areas and dense brush. I believe that's all part of the game. The coordinates are right on, but the terrain is a 3+.

 

--

SpongeRob

rwmech@keenpeople.com

www.keenpeople.com

WPWU826

 

Cache'n Retrievers

[+fizzymagic]

The cacher does include a couple of obscure "hints" that are supposed to direct you to the cache, and people (including me) have found them by a combination of searching and using the hints. And all the caches were approved, as far as I know, as they read today.

 

But these hints are not letterbox-style hints; they are vague references at best. And the use of a GPSr is entirely irrelevant to finding the cache.

 

Maybe I am over-reacting, but it seems to me that the essence of geocaching is, as I said before, in the coordinates.

 

[This message was edited by fizzymagic on March 24, 2003 at 02:30 PM.]

[+kbrece]

Hey Fizzymagic -

 

I'm from your general area, so I know which caches you are talking about. When the first one was posted I thought it would be fun to "think like a geocacher" and find the cache by intuition. I thought it was a unique idea until the next one was approved. It's hard enough to find a cache with exact coordinates sometimes.

 

Like the moving caches around here, I am probably going to ignore these until they drive me so crazy that I find them.

 

Thanks for posting this. I didn't know if it bothered anyone else.

 

Krystal

 

"Today's mighty oak is yesterday's nut that held its ground."

[+dino_hunters]

I went to one cache that apparently gave bad coordinates. The cache was in a tree, that had a numbered tag on it, in a park. You could not see the cache in the tree, unless you went to the coordinates, and looked at the tree. It was a microcache that turned out to be 15 feet up in the tree!! It took us 45 minutes, and was a lot of fun.

[+flask]

i think that maybe wrong coordinates are appropriate if, say the correct ones are available. there are a couple of ways to do it: for instance, the correct coordinates could be on a TB or in another cache.

 

the idea behind posting it with wrong coords is that it allows for TBs in it to be logged without messing up their mileage, and it allows the finder to log what would otherwise be an unpublished cache. it is imperative, however, that these coordinates are clearly labeled as wrong and that the hunter knows not to use them.

 

it doesn't matter if you get to camp at one or at six. dinner is still at six.

[+Renegade Knight]

quote:

---

Originally posted by fizzymagic:

The cacher _does_ include a couple of obscure "hints" that are supposed to direct you to the cache, and people (including me) have found them by a combination of searching and using the hints. And all the caches were approved, as far as I know, as they read today.

 

But these hints are not letterbox-style hints; they are vague references at best. And the use of a GPSr is entirely irrelevant to finding the cache.

 

Maybe I am over-reacting, but it seems to me that the essence of geocaching is, as I said before, in the coordinates.

 

[This message was edited by fizzymagic on March 24, 2003 at 02:30 PM.]

---

 

I've done the obscure hint thing on one cache and will do it again when I replace that cache. It was plundered so it must of been too easy.

 

Wherever you go there you are.