Locationless cache suggestions ?

1.3k · October 18, 2002

Today there is 240 locationless caches in geocaching.com database. When i browsed through them, i noticed that many interesting locationless cache ideas are already there. I mean such locationless caches that are truly locationless, not restricted to one state or one country.

What is left ? Here's something that came in to my mind:

obelisk - can be found around the globe

old milestone (made of stone) - at least in USA, Great Britain & Ireland

old kilometer stone (made of stone) - rest of the world

List your suggestions !

38.2k · October 18, 2002

I'm not a fan of locationless caches, so I don't want to encourage them.

"Life is a daring adventure, or it is nothing" - Helen Keller

1k · October 18, 2002

Please? As you've said, there are already so (too) many. Why encourage more of this illigitimate spawn?

Worldtraveler

October 18, 2002

I listed about 50 of my favorites (of the 240 some) in my PDA. I always carry my camera and GPS with me and when I see something I snap and waypoint it. Granted, I am behind in my logging, but having just as much fun. Easier to remember to say...look for a historic covered bridge while I am in Oregon or stand-alone analog giant clocks in Seattle, when I don't want to preplan some hunts, or I am not the driver and they don't want to drive out of their way. Was that a long enough run on sentence?

****************************************************

Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted.

1.3k · October 19, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by worldtraveler:
Please? As you've said, there are already so (too) many. Why encourage more of this illigitimate spawn?

What will you do when you have found all the caches that are in reasonable distance from your home and when you have placed so many caches that you do not want place any more of them? Will you stop geocaching ? That's the situation i have now so only caches i can still find are the locationless caches, so i really do want to encourage more geocachers to think about also locationless caches... (BTW, i have asked many geocachers to place new regular caches in their hometown or homecounty but only 1 one of them have placed a new cache...)

1.3k · October 19, 2002

> - obelisk - can be found around the globe

> - old milestone (made of stone) - at least in

> USA, Great Britain & Ireland

> - old kilometer stone (made of stone) - rest

> of the world

And some more:

- ship anchor out of place, i.e. out of ship, for example as a monument in a park

- meteor craters of the world

- retired helicopters

What do you think about these as a locationless

caches?

1.3k · October 19, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:
I'm not a fan of locationless caches, so I don't want to encourage them.

Well, you should try to find some of them, as you may also learn something. At least i have learned several things (for example what is a meromictic lake) and seen many interesting things and places that i would have otherwise never seen.

6.5k · October 19, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Captain_Morgan&Family:
What will you do when you have found all the caches that are in reasonable distance from your home and when you have placed so many caches that you do not want place any more of them? Will you stop geocaching ?

i think some of these cachers would:

A. starting doing maintance and spot checks on caches that aren't even their own and there are no reported problems.

B. Steal their own caches so they have a vacant spot to hide another one

C. Change jobs and relocate so they can find caches they've never been to before

quote:
Originally posted by CM&family
What do you think about these ?

...

What do you think about these as a locationless

caches?

if you think you have a good idea for one sumit it. maybe it will get approved, maybe not. maybe someone will find it, maybe not.

October 19, 2002

Those sound like good ideas, should submit them all. Locationless are fine with me. Just something else to look for and it gets me out of my house - but some people need that tupperware/ammo box at the end of the rainbox.....

_________________________________________________________________

I'm afraid I have no choice but to sell you all for medical experiments.

1.3k · October 19, 2002

If anyone wants to use my ideas of the locationless caches i mentioned earlier, please feel free to use them...

October 19, 2002

I've logged one or two locationless caches and can see the value and enjoyment of them. I don't like them on the same pages as conventional caches, just as I do many virtuals but would rather see them seperated from actual caches just as benchmarks are. Your suggestion about helicopters interests me. Also, war memorials, which is pretty big locally as a virtual, could be a locationless. I'd like to see locationless coordimates change though, as some can stick on the not found pages and some of us are motivated by clearing all the caches in our locale.

Steve Bukosky N9BGH

Waukesha Wisconsin

6.5k · October 19, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Steve Bukosky:
. Also, war memorials, which is pretty big locally as a virtual, could be a locationless.

isnt there already a war memorial locationless?

1k · October 19, 2002

Sorry for the double post. This was created when I tried to correct formatting on the following post, and deletions are no longer allowed.

[This message was edited by worldtraveler on October 19, 2002 at 11:21 PM.]

1k · October 19, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Captain_Morgan&Family:
What will you do when you have found all the caches that are in reasonable distance from your home...

Well, a "reasonable distance" for me is quite far; so it not likely I'll ever run out of caches to hunt.

It's not the lack of a box I'm opposed to, it's the concept of not even having a set of coordinates to navigate to. Happening upon neat places or unusual objects and encouraging others to report the location of similar places/objects they happen upon may be a wonderful activity, it's just not geocaching, in my opinion. I explain why at http://opentopic.Groundspeak.com/0/OpenTopic?q=Y&s=1750973553&a=tpc&m=5300943704&f=3000917383 if you're interested.

[This message was edited by worldtraveler on October 19, 2002 at 11:27 PM.]

October 20, 2002

Locationless caches seem like alot of fun but I don't think it's geo caching. Has anyone started a thread about other fun things to do with a GPSr?? If not I think I will. I have some fun ideas. Most of them are even legal.

You can't be lost if you don't care where you are.

5k · October 20, 2002

Count me as another that agrees with WT. Locationless finds may be fun, sure. But it's not geocaching. There ought to be a separate site/area for that type of thing. If there were, I might be more interested in looking for them.

Jamie

6.5k · October 20, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Z:
Count me as another that agrees with WT. Locationless finds may be fun, sure. But it's not geocaching. There ought to be a separate site/area for that type of thing. If there were, I might be more interested in looking for them.

Jamie

you want a total different site? or just a system that keeps track of the different types and how many of each you've found?

i wish the system would automatically tally the numbers of physicals, virtuals, locations, etc etc,(rather than grouping them into one total) but thats just me.

3k · October 20, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Captain_Morgan&Family:

What will you do when you have found all the caches that are in reasonable distance from your home and when you have placed so many caches that you do not want place any more of them? Will you stop geocaching ?

There are no caches remaining within 25 miles of home that interest me, but there is still quite a good selection from 50 - 100 miles from home.

So my answer to the question is "Yes." When there are no caches close enough to home to fit the time I have available for caching, I stop caching until some new ones have been placed or I have time to travel farther out.

Locationless caches do not interest me ... I follow Nancy Reagan's words of wisdom by "Just Saying NO" to locationless caches, even though items that would qualify as finds for at least 50 locationless finds are located within 5 miles of home ... I notice that three such items are within a block of home. I agree with all the others who have voiced the opinion "It's just not geocaching."

Jeremy Irish has often referred to Locationless Caches as "Reverse Caches." I agree with that, and think each "Reverse Cache" logged as a find should add -1 to that person's find count.

[Rant Mode On] And it really burns my shorts when people claim finds for virtual caches and then log a second (or third ... or fourth) find for the same objects as locationless caches. That's cheating of the worst kind intended solely to pad one's find count; there is no other way of looking at it. It's even lower than claiming finds on the same cache multiple times or logging finds on one's own caches. [Rant Mode Off]

3k · October 20, 2002

They've all been done as virtual caches.

One of the generally accepted rules of Locationless Caches is that a specific location can be claimed only once. I recommend that any of those suggested objects/sites that can be found in the local area could be established as virtual caches, which would benefit the entire local geocaching community instead of only one person.

October 20, 2002

Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

Locationless caches do not interest me ... I follow Nancy Reagan's words of wisdom by _"Just Saying NO"_ to locationless caches, even though items that would qualify as finds for at least 50 locationless finds are located within 5 miles of home ... I notice that three such items are within a block of home. I agree with all the others who have voiced the opinion _"It's just not geocaching."_

Jeremy Irish has often referred to Locationless Caches as "Reverse Caches." I agree with that, and think each "Reverse Cache" logged as a find should add -1 to that person's find count.

_________________________________________________

Locationless caches are part of geocaching. Different than traditional caches? Definately! Reality is that they are included. I personally don't prefer to look for caches that involve the water, but I wouldn't want them removed, and I wouldn't criticize those who do find them enjoyable. I definately wouldn't track those caches and see how many near my home that I could find if I wanted. Then again, I'm not interested in tracking my find count or comparing it to anyone else's, either. It seems like those who are focused on making geocaching a competition are the ones with the strongest opinions against locationless caches.

GoBucks

October 20, 2002

This is where I start wishing the finds count didn't exist. To me geocaching is a personal challenge to hunt something and find it, no matter what it is. The desire to set out and complete a mission - if I do that, everything falls into one big category, "found".

_________________________________________________________________

I'm afraid I have no choice but to sell you all for medical experiments.

3k · October 20, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by gobucks:

Locationless caches are part of geocaching. Different than traditional caches? Definately! Reality is that they are included. I personally don't prefer to look for caches that involve the water, but I wouldn't want them removed, and I wouldn't criticize those who do find them enjoyable.

I don't mind that you quoted me, but I definitely need to correct your apparent misunderstanding.

You are of course correct in stating that locationless caches are presently included. What the future holds, neither you nor I know.

Secondly, to state that one has no personal desire to pursue and log locationless caches does not amount to criticism of those who do. Your post was, in fact, little more than an example of inappropriate personal criticism.

Thirdly, I did not state that Locationless Caches should be "removed."

I did, in fact, suggest in the very next post that a person considering creating or claiming a locationless cache might better serve their local geocaching community by creating a virtual cache from the object/location instead.

Your comments/criticism of that suggestion are welcomed.

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on October 20, 2002 at 10:09 AM.]

1.6k · October 20, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Captain_Morgan&Family:
What is left ? Here's something that came in to my mind:

obelisk - can be found around the globe

old milestone (made of stone) - at least in USA, Great Britain & Ireland

old kilometer stone (made of stone) - rest of the world

List your suggestions !

How about another cache like the Waterloo around the world cache? Find all the towns named "X". How about a locationless cache that will lead to a useful database? Like all the canoe/kayak-able rivers with cachers logging their favorite launch point?

By appointment to the Court of HRM Queen Mikki I.

October 20, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

Secondly, to state that one has no personal desire to pursue and log locationless caches does not amount to criticism of those who do. Your post was, in fact, little more than an example of inappropriate personal criticism.

Thirdly, I did not state that Locationless Caches should be "removed."

I did, in fact, suggest in the very next post that a person considering creating or claiming a locationless cache might better serve their local geocaching community by creating a virtual cache from the object/location instead.

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on October 20, 2002 at 10:09 AM.]

Personal criticism is open to interpretation. I agree that Bassoon Pilot did not state that Locationless Caches should be "removed." Of course, I only commented on what I would or would not do. I guess that it's open to interpretation as well. At any rate, I apologize for any perceived personal attack, and will in the future be more careful about placing general comments below a quote. I agree that your suggestion about virtual caches has merit.

GoBucks

October 20, 2002

Geocaching is supposed to be about using a GPSr to hunt down something. If all you are going to do is find a quanset hut, take a picture of it and post the Lat. Long., you might just as well give the street address. Like I said it's fun but not caching. I really don't see the connection at all. Maybe we should all go around town and find the cheapest gas, plug in the coordinates and call it geocaching. I did notice that one of the posters above had claimed at least 85 of the first 125 caches as locationless, which is fine, I guess, as long as he doesn't consider it a great competitive achievement. Which from his comments so far I gather he doesn't. Did we have a poll and I lost already? ...Pretty opinionated for a newby, hu??

You can't be lost if you don't care where you are.

1.3k · October 20, 2002

Oh well, i just asked geocachers to list things that would be nice as locationless caches and now this thread has turned to something else...

October 20, 2002

I have never been able to understand why cachers who profess to have "no interest" in locationless caches track them, take the time to read threads about them, and post responses (usually off-topic). Seems like every topic concerning locationless caches turns into a debate about their existance. I've noticed the sme thing to a lesser extent with virtual and micro cache topics.

GoBucks

6.5k · October 20, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Captain_Morgan&Family:
Oh well, i just asked geocachers to list things that would be nice as locationless caches and now this thread has turned to something else...

I blam BassoonPilot for that , but really it would probly have happened anyways .

how can you keep something on topic??

3k · October 20, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Captain_Morgan&Family:
Oh well, i just asked geocachers to list things that would be nice as locationless caches and now this thread has turned to something else...

Since the problem with many locationless caches is that they present no challenge at all, try these on for size:

Go to a cemetery and find an uncommon name (first and last), and use that as the basis of your locationless cache. (You could require that the finder match the exact name or locate a name equally uncommon.) An alternate might be for the claimant to match their precise name against a tombstone not belonging to a known relation.

Or you could have people precisely match birth and death dates from a given tombstone.

People like those war memorials ... pick an uncommon name off of a war memorial and have people match the exact name, but from a different war.

An easy one would be misspelled signs. Those are almost as common as old Volkswagon Beetles abandoned in the woods.

October 25, 2002

I seem to recall there was a LC based on finding an unusuaully painted l;imo. also finding a geodesic building. Now I can't find either one. Does anyone know which one this is? or were they archived?

www.gpswnj.com

1.6k · October 25, 2002

One thing that might be cool is to look for heads and tails of streams. A cacher could place caches at these locations, but the caches may not be stable given floods. Still, the locale may be nice and worth seeing.

A lot of these LCs that are already listed are not the kind that lead one to find some new place that wouldn't be visited were it not for the cache. The types mentioned above (cemetary headstone names, etc) are good examples of these.

I guess I don't mind using LC's as a "wildcard" Virtual Cache. For example: locate the headwater and mouth of the major streams in your home town, but you can only take credit for one of them(either the mouth or the head) and only one person can count the find. This would be different for each city, and may lead to interesting sight-seeing on the part of the cachers.

By appointment to the Court of HRM Queen Mikki I.

6.5k · October 26, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Gwho:
I seem to recall there was a LC based on finding an unusuaully painted l;imo. also finding a geodesic building. Now I can't find either one. Does anyone know which one this is? or were they archived?

i know theres one called dome home, maybe thats what you want?

as for creative camo i dont know

1.6k · October 26, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by bigredmed:
One thing that might be cool is to look for heads and tails of streams. A cacher could place caches at these locations, but the caches may not be stable given floods. Still, the locale may be nice and worth seeing.

I guess I don't mind using LC's as a "wildcard" Virtual Cache. For example: locate the headwater and mouth of the major streams in your home town, but you can only take credit for one of them(either the mouth or the head) and only one person can count the find. This would be different for each city, and may lead to interesting sight-seeing on the part of the cachers.

By appointment to the Court of HRM Queen Mikki I.

By appointment to the Court of HRM Queen Mikki I.

Locationless cache suggestions ?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation