Jump to content

Simple Caches Boring?


YodaDoe

Recommended Posts

It's easy to uncover examples of people who engage in activities like the one I mentioned earlier.  All you have to do is stop "trolling" and "attempting to inflame a discussion" for a few minutes and do a miniscule amount of research.

 

Even you could accomplish that, Yumitori, if you tried really, really hard.

 

Funny, funny man. You post inflammatory claims, then accuse others of causing problems. I also see you went back and edited your original post. Interesting...

 

I have no doubt that there are scattered examples of what you originally said. But even if Quest Master is correct and this has happened in more places than he is aware of, it hardly means that 'many' caches are placed for the purpose inflating cache counts. But even if there's people doing so everywhere except the Pacific Northwest (the only area I have personal experience with and where there are definitely not 'many' people doing this), who cares?

 

My wife and I maintain separate accounts, for various reasons unimportant to this thread. I recently hide a simple little puzzle cache to give newer folks a little practice and everyone else something to do while the mountains are too snowed in. My wife didn't even know it was coming out. But after it was approved by geocaching.com she sat down while I was at work, answered the questions, and went out and found the container. Yet she did not post a find or sign the log until others did so first. There's local folks who also worry more about what others are doing than their own efforts, who make snide, belittling, uninformed comments behind people's backs. She would rather have let someone else claim a FTF than listen to the whining.

 

Fortunately, being first finder is pretty much unimportant around here. We're just glad when there's any caches to find at all. But this is hardly the only example of how people worrying about how others geocache has affected the game in the area.

 

It's sad that people caching in ways you dislike is such an issue for you. But as the other posts in this thread show, there's plenty of reasons why someone might choose to hide a simple cache without delving into claims of specious inflation of cache finds. But feel free to spend your time judging others; you are no doubt having just as beneficial effect upon your local scene as your counterparts are having here...

Link to comment

About half my finds (13) were with my kids ages 5 & 8. Many of the caches in my area are similar and have been found by families. The one I recently hid is 2 miles out with a 1000 foot elevation gain and you have to leave the trail at some point. My son is just now saying he might want to go when I make the first maintenance visit.

 

So place it and rate it properly. If it sounds to easy for some they can simply avoid it. If it is rated 1/1 and they go anyway then it was there choice.

Link to comment
I know of a pair of very prolific cachers that have a combined total of almost 500 hides. They are VERY closely related and often work as a team. It happens sometimes that one of them will log a find on a cache the same day it is hidden. You can make your own inference about what is going on there.

Sounds they hid it together and the second guy is logging it as a find to get it off his "filter finds" list. What's the problem?

Link to comment

The following is not directed at anyone in particular - just ranting.....

 

This is ridiculous. Why complain about a cache - ANY cache? Somebody took the time to put the thing out there - you didn't ask them to do it, they aren't looking to impress you, and chances are somebody else WILL enjoy the find. Since when did YOUR standards become so incredibly interesting and valuable that you feel the need to share? Be gracious - I know which of my caches are lame because the logs read like this: "tnln, thanks for the cache." I know when I'm doing better because the logs are much more interesting to read. So please, keep your negative comments and criticisms of caches to yourself. Nobody wants to listen to it. Eveybody gets more than enough flak in the rest of their life - they don't need your contribution for something they did for fun. Get over yourself!

 

Whew. I feel a lot better now. <_<B)B)

Link to comment
didn't see the point...

 

There are two slightly different issues at play here. The first is, "easy cache". The second is, "pointless cache". They're not the same.

 

Easy caches are just fine by me.

 

Pointless caches are less so. Your front yard. Is it anything special? Out in the woods perhaps, a nice drive, something like that? Or is it just a front yard? See, one of the things about GeoCaching that provides ongoing enjoyment is exposure to new and interesting places. They don't all have to be "Coffee Table Book" quality (the standard for Virtuals now), but they should be something, even if only a nice corner of a local park. A cache in your front yard is probably pointless in this regard - the normal cacher asks, "why did you bring me here?"

 

The most pointless cache I've been to so far was on the front of a restaurant. Now, perhaps this is a restaurant that the cache hider likes - I'm pretty sure it is - but so what? The response in the written logs was often "this is it? Nearby is a two-stage multi on a short urban nature trail along an exposed part of an otherwise flood controlled creek. That cache has a point. The restaurant cache didn't, or didn't much.

 

It's subtle. Without a cache, the good destination is incomplete. Without a good destination, the cache is incomplete. You need to try to find both to have a good hide.

This is the kind of outlook I was trying to find out about. I think WalruZ makes a good point. For many people, a cache like mine IS rather pointless. There's nothing special about my yard or my neighborhood. But I HAVE learned that this kind of cache is useful to many other people -- i.e., different caches for different folks.

 

I thought at first that Wimseyguy was also finding my cache pointless, but he was mostly just asking if that's all it was supposed to be because, a) I have no cache's logged and would appear to be a total newbie, and <_< there is another person in my area who does surveys with simple traditional caches to add interest to them.

 

Just for the record, I hold no ill-will toward him or anyone. I appreciate feedback. And I appreciate all the viewpoints I've read on this thread.

 

YodaDoe

Link to comment
I know of a pair of very prolific cachers that have a combined total of almost 500 hides.  They are VERY closely related and often work as a team.  It happens sometimes that one of them will log a find on a cache the same day it is hidden.  You can make your own inference about what is going on there.

Sounds they hid it together and the second guy is logging it as a find to get it off his "filter finds" list. What's the problem?

In a specific example that I know of, the cache in question was hidden approximately 300 miles from their home. They managed to find somebody to maintain the cache so that it could be approved well after it had already been found by one of them. I don't care if they did it to pad their stats or not. That's their problem. The issue I have with their behavior is that they hid another junk cache in a mundane location. The game is degraded by caches like this. Who will stay to play if they find very many of these? The vast, vast majority of cachers and especially the newbies don't care even one little bit about numbers. They are looking for something fun to do. Lame (i.e. not fun) caches aren't good for the game.

Link to comment
The following is not directed at anyone in particular - just ranting.....

 

This is ridiculous. Why complain about a cache - ANY cache? Somebody took the time to put the thing out there - you didn't ask them to do it, they aren't looking to impress you, and chances are somebody else WILL enjoy the find. Since when did YOUR standards become so incredibly interesting and valuable that you feel the need to share? Be gracious - I know which of my caches are lame because the logs read like this: "tnln, thanks for the cache." I know when I'm doing better because the logs are much more interesting to read. So please, keep your negative comments and criticisms of caches to yourself. Nobody wants to listen to it. Eveybody gets more than enough flak in the rest of their life - they don't need your contribution for something they did for fun. Get over yourself!

 

Whew. I feel a lot better now. :(:):D

Bingo! Hit the nail on the head! :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Sounds they hid it together and the second guy is logging it as a find to get it off his "filter finds" list. ...

 

Nope.

 

Let's see ... highway mile markers are spaced at 528 ft intervals, so if I buy a couple of mini-notepads, tear out one sheet of paper at a time and tape them to the back of each marker, everyone will have an opportunity to enjoy these outstanding caches.

 

BP, that sounds great. It took me over 2 years to reach 200 finds. I can bag my next 200 in an afternoon! When you sign the log for me, remember that Briansnat is one word :rolleyes: .

Link to comment
This has given me a great idea ... I'm going to create a series of hundreds of lame caches entitled "Idolatry Cache #xxx" specifically for those people who get the DTs whenever they aren't posting a find.

 

Let's see ... highway mile markers are spaced at 528 ft intervals, so if I buy a couple of mini-notepads, tear out one sheet of paper at a time and tape them to the back of each marker,  everyone will have an opportunity to enjoy these outstanding caches.  Naturally, I will pre-sign the names of those cachers who routinely place caches similar to these so that they can claim their find from the comfort of their computer chair.

 

Remember:  Quantity is much more important than quality.  :(

 

Quest Master, if I come place a series of these "Idolatry Caches" in your area, will you agree to maintain them for me? :rolleyes:

 

"Bingo!  Hit the nail on the head!"

Sure! Why not? Any cache is a good cache, right? I will be so happy to wake up one one of these mornings and find two hundred or so new caches like this on my search listing to "find". :)

 

By the way BP, I already thought of this idea except that I was going to use film canisters attached with velcro tape. I like your idea better. It's cheaper and easier to set up even if it does require more frequent maintenance. :D

Edited by Quest Master
Link to comment

Is there anything wrong with this cache? I'd say no. It is perfectly fine and I would go log it.

 

Would I enjoy it? Not really, but I still would go find it.

 

Would it be appropriate for me to send an email asking 'What's the point?' No. That is clearly pointless and rude. I'd log the cache with somethng like 'TNLN. Thanks.'

 

BP- I don't understand why you have such strong feelings about this issue. Yes, peopel do place lame caches so their buds can increase there log count. Some lamers even carry them around in the back of their truck so only their buds (or those that beg) can log them. This problem does likely exist in many caching areas; certainly it does in Nashville.

 

I pray that this isn't the primary reason for the hiding of many of the lamest-of-caches. I think other reasons for this are 'spawn' caches and pressure placed on cachers to hide more caches.

 

Frankly, I did have an issue with your original statement. When you use terms like 'primary reason', 'many', and 'lamest' without any substantiation, you are doing a disservice and begging for argument. In that sense, you were a troller.

Link to comment
BP- I don't understand why you have such strong feelings about this issue. Yes, peopel do place lame caches so their buds can increase there log count. Some lamers even carry them around in the back of their truck so only their buds (or those that beg) can log them. This problem does likely exist in many caching areas; certainly it does in Nashville.

 

I guess my problem with BP's response is that it really does nothing to answer the original question from a newbie, and in my opinion isn't a good way to welcome a newbie to the game and/or forums. They asked a simple yes or no question. They didn't ask for a dissertation on cheating, trolling, flaming, or rude comments. Most everyone here has given a good, honest answer, so I don't see why you felt compelled to stir the pot. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
I would like to search for this cache in hopes that the owner would see me, come out and say hi. What a great way to meet some new fellow cachers.

Sure, come one by! I'm just a hop, skip, and 20 million jumps from you! :rolleyes:

 

Is there any chance of getting those posts that are off-topic relegated to their own thread?  Perhaps a new thread should be started to discuss these issues.  This thread was specific to this one cache. 

 

Hey, half the fun of a good thread is the mutation! It's what drives evolution, you know. Unless you don't believe in that sort of thing...

 

Yoda(not quite as hairy as his distant ancestors)Doe

Edited by YodaDoe
Link to comment
<snip>

Is there anything wrong with this cache?  I'd say no.  It is perfectly fine and I would go log it.

 

Would I enjoy it?  Not really, but I still would go find it.

 

Would it be appropriate for me to send an email asking 'What's the point?'  No.  That is clearly pointless and rude.  I'd log the cache with somethng like 'TNLN. Thanks.'

<snip>

Once again I'll make the point that CONTEXT can and does influence your replies.

Remember I did read the cache page and did go find the cache.

My cache log was: Well this was different. TNLNSL

My email privatly sent to YD asked the question what was your agenda in hiding this particular cache, in the context of the other grad student who had the questionnaires. Did I enjoy to hunt for this cache? A little bit, for a short time.

 

The local result of this discourse is: YD wrote:Just for the record, I hold no ill-will toward him or anyone. I appreciate feedback. And I appreciate all the viewpoints I've read on this thread

 

WalrusZ got where I was coming from:<snip>

Pointless caches are less so. Your front yard. Is it anything special? Out in the woods perhaps, a nice drive, something like that? Or is it just a front yard? See, one of the things about GeoCaching that provides ongoing enjoyment is exposure to new and interesting places. They don't all have to be "Coffee Table Book" quality (the standard for Virtuals now), but they should be something, even if only a nice corner of a local park. A cache in your front yard is probably pointless in this regard - the normal cacher asks, "why did you bring me here?" <snip>

 

Although I normally agree with most of BP's statments I don't understand the derailing of this thread to discuss "caches created to inflate find counts", but maybe I missed some context he sees.

 

Everyone else who thought me rude or pointless-fuggettabbouit :(:)

Have a great day, now either go back to work or get out and find some caches-any caches great, lame, virtual, locationless it doesn't matter. The hunt is the joy for me. :rolleyes:

edited for <snip>additions

Edited by wimseyguy
Link to comment
<<SNIP>> Most everyone here has given a good, honest answer, so I don't see why you felt compelled to stir the pot. :rolleyes:

Maybe it's because he speaks from experience. Experience in Geocaching. The thing these forums are supposed to be about. While I sometimes disagree with his thoughts I respect them because he's not just giving an uninformed opinion.

 

I have almost 300 finds and I still look to people like BP for information and direction. Y

Link to comment
<<SNIP>>  Most everyone here has given a good, honest answer, so I don't see why you felt compelled to stir the pot. :rolleyes:

Maybe it's because he speaks from experience. Experience in Geocaching. The thing these forums are supposed to be about. While I sometimes disagree with his thoughts I respect them because he's not just giving an uninformed opinion.

 

I have almost 300 finds and I still look to people like BP for information and direction. Y

But in context with the topic, this to me is still stirring the pot, regardless of the amount of experience in geocaching. I guess you must not understand my point, or the topic of this thread.

 

Wimseyguy has already posted his side of the story, and Yodadoe has posted his side, and both did so without creating any havoc. I don't see anything wrong with Yodadoe's cache, nor with the email he got from Wimseyguy.

Link to comment
<<SNIP>>

But in context with the topic, this to me is still stirring the pot, regardless of the amount of experience in geocaching. I guess you must not understand my point, or the topic of this thread.

 

<<SNIP>>

I do understand the topic of this thread. As shown by my post on the first page.. As to your point I must have missed it. Which post was that? Was it between posts 1-1000 or in the 1001-1800 post range?

Link to comment
<<SNIP>>

But in context with the topic, this to me is still stirring the pot, regardless of the amount of experience in geocaching.  I guess you must not understand my point, or the topic of this thread.

 

<<SNIP>>

I do understand the topic of this thread. As shown by my post on the first page.. As to your point I must have missed it. Which post was that? Was it between posts 1-1000 or in the 1001-1800 post range?

Well, then at one time you understood the topic, but you apparently lost it. Was that between inflammatory post 1-5, or inflammatory post 6-10? At least most of the people here have been on topic and respectful of the topic starter, rather than derailing the thread in their quest to prove once and again what superior cachers and posters they are. Well, when you reach 1800 posts, then maybe I'll begin to listen to you, but until then, I'll ignore your inexperience. Nuff sed. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
At least most of the people here have been on topic and respectful of the topic starter, rather than derailing the thread in their quest to prove once and again what superior cachers and posters they are.

If you are referring to my statement, YodaDoe's original question had been answered many times before I commented on postings by two individuals who are not YodaDoe.

 

Exactly how many times by exactly how many people do the answers to a simple question need to be repeated before anything else that appeared in a thread can be commented on or discussed?

I guess that depends on who you ask. Some will say never, because off-topic posts are wrong, and should be opened in a new thread. Others will say do it whenever you get the urge. Me? Guess that depends on the tone of the off-topic posts, but that's not a fair assumption, either, because I've seen a lot of inflammatory posts here that were almost on-topic, but not quite. I suppose what I'm actually trying to say is, if you can't say anything nice, don't say it at all. If you have an opposing view, express it without the inflammatory remarks, personal attacks, and rudely ignorant generalizations. I'll be the first to admit I generally post off-topic, but only in a vague attempt at humor to lighten a subject. I tend to shy away from posting either on or off-topic in an inflammatory way, unless someone is just really trying to push my buttons or anyone else's buttons. Sorry, we're not all perfect.

Link to comment
<<SNIP>> I'll be the first to admit I generally post off-topic, but only in a vague attempt at humor to lighten a subject. I tend to shy away from posting either on or off-topic in an inflammatory way, unless someone is just really trying to push my buttons or anyone else's buttons. Sorry, we're not all perfect.

So if I read this correctly. You are a self appointed moderator of the Geocaching forums. That must explains you only having time to find 22 caches while posting with such great wisdom.

 

I apologize for not respecting you lofty post count.

Link to comment
<<SNIP>> I'll be the first to admit I generally post off-topic, but only in a vague attempt at humor to lighten a subject.  I tend to shy away from posting either on or off-topic in an inflammatory way, unless someone is just really trying to push my buttons or anyone else's buttons.  Sorry, we're not all perfect.

So if I read this correctly. You are a self appointed moderator of the Geocaching forums. That must explains you only having time to find 22 caches while posting with such great wisdom.

 

I apologize for not respecting you lofty post count.

Is it up to 22 now? Cool. And, to get back on topic, a lot of those finds were very easy...actually, all but one or two were very easy, and I was very thankful that the owners placed them, and said so in the logs. Now, if I wasn't stuck in bed most of the time due to a couple of herniated discs, I might have, oh, maybe 23 or 24 finds now. Due to my inability to walk any great distance, I'm very greatful for the easy caches. Thanks for asking.

Link to comment

Risking posting off-topic, but why is Sparky being attacked for taking the same position as I when I am not? Is it because he's an easier target because I have more than 23 finds? (Congrats on the new finds!)

 

The bottom line to this whole issue is, BP's original post was off-topic and inflamatory. This is true whether reading it in its entirety or dissecting it. (I got your email BP.)

 

The fact is, the problems he addressed do occur, although I doubt they are as widespread as he proposed. This thread, however, was not the place for the concerns and they could have been addressed more tactfully.

Link to comment
<<SNIP>> Now, if I wasn't stuck in bed most of the time due to a couple of herniated discs, I might have, oh, maybe 23 or 24 finds now. Due to my inability to walk any great distance, I'm very greatful for the easy caches. Thanks for asking.

Ouch!!!

The pity card has been played.

 

I think we all understand now.

Link to comment
<<SNIP>> Now, if I wasn't stuck in bed most of the time due to a couple of herniated discs, I might have, oh, maybe 23 or 24 finds now.  Due to my inability to walk any great distance, I'm very  greatful for the easy caches.  Thanks for asking.

Ouch!!!

The pity card has been played.

 

I think we all understand now.

Careful there......you almost sounded sincere! :huh:

 

I was right, you can't stay on topic, can you? But, thank you for the pity, anyway, even though I don't recall asking for it. I guess you're just better than me, as everyone can see, so I'll go back to just wishing I could get out and find those really simple, boring caches, so long as really simple and boring people will let me.

 

YodaDoe, I'm so sorry you had to witness this dark side of the forums. Please don't let it get to you, and please don't think that everyone here is like Harrald and Basoon Pilot, we're not. And, fortunately, not everyone here is like me, either.

 

Keep hiding the simple caches if that's what makes you happy. Keep seeking the simple caches if that's what makes you happy. And keep asking any questions you want here, and hopefully folks will treat you and your thread with a little more maturity and respect. My apologies to you for not doing all that I could to keep it on topic. I tried. Really, I did.

Link to comment

yodadoe i read your cachepage and i think you were right on with your description of the cache. you mentioned right in the description not to use the map. you can't please everyone. i would say to leave it and see what happens. if your neighbors aren't complaining just let it go.

Link to comment
yodadoe i read your cachepage and i think you were right on with your description of the cache. you mentioned right in the description not to use the map. you can't please everyone. i would say to leave it and see what happens. if your neighbors aren't complaining just let it go.

Just FYI, the description was considerably less detailed when Wimseyguy first read it. I did have it scored as a 1/1 and described it as a simple, traditional cache. And Wimseyguy's email didn't really complain about it at all... more like question to make sure he understood the point of it. There is another grad student at NC State that places easy caches with surveys in them and he thought I might have been involved.

 

Wimseyguy also brought up an important point that, for some people, this kind of cache is boring. And I don't fault him for pointing that out, because it's true. This is why I changed the description to state explicitly that the cache does not entail an interesting location or a challanging hunt.

 

The original reason I posted my question was that I was unsure if there WAS a niche for this kind of cache. And I know now that there is. So I changed my description to what you now see and everyone's happy! Thanks for the words of encouragement, though!

 

YodaDoe

Link to comment

"Don't think everyone here is like Harrald?"

 

We should be so lucky to have more people like Harrald. No whining or complaints - just good sound advice. Of course, that's just my opinion.

 

BTW Sparky. Herniated disks aren't the end of the world. I had a "candlewax rupture" of a disk some years ago and still enjoy backpacking, climbing, canoeing, etc..... so I hope you feel better soon. I've just had to give up the belly dancing career.

 

20839231-a5d5-44e5-bc84-056e58f1f4ef.jpg

Edited by HartClimbs
Link to comment
"Don't think everyone here is like Harrald?"

 

We should be so lucky to have more people like Harrald. No whining or complaints - just good sound advice. Of course, that's just my opinion.

 

BTW Sparky. Herniated disks aren't the end of the world. I had a "candlewax rupture" of a disk some years ago and still enjoy backpacking, climbing, canoeing, etc..... so I hope you feel better soon. I've just had to give up the belly dancing career.

 

20839231-a5d5-44e5-bc84-056e58f1f4ef.jpg

Hey, I've had one repaired/fused already, but still have permanent nerve damage from it. That was almost 3 years ago, and the one just above it herniated within 9 months of the surgery, and now there's one down lower that's going. Sucks getting old.

 

No whining or complaints - just good sound advice. 

 

Hmmm....I've heard more than enough whining and complaints from Harrald about people here in the forums who like having fun. Lighten up, Francis. The forums ain't life and death. He's got his world, I've got mine. Neither of those is here. And this ain't the place to debate it.

Link to comment
<<SNIP>>

 

Hmmm....I've heard more than enough whining and complaints from Harrald about people here in the forums who like having fun. Lighten up, Francis. The forums ain't life and death. He's got his world, I've got mine. Neither of those is here. And this ain't the place to debate it.

Hey,

 

It's better than treating the forums like an AOL chatroom and posting incorrect and misquoted information.

Link to comment
The following is not directed at anyone in particular - just ranting.....

 

This is ridiculous. Why complain about a cache - ANY cache? Somebody took the time to put the thing out there - you didn't ask them to do it, they aren't looking to impress you, and chances are somebody else WILL enjoy the find. Since when did YOUR standards become so incredibly interesting and valuable that you feel the need to share?

Bravo, well said

Link to comment

 

It's better than treating the forums like an AOL chatroom and  posting incorrect and misquoted information.

In your opinion, anyway. But thanks for sharing.

An opinion that was formed from personal experience.

 

Not from regurgitating what I’ve read or heard about.

 

I’m done answering this troll. He’ll get bored and leave sooner or later. I’ll still be here. Finding caches and participating in this game. I also won’t post his PM to me or forward it the Groundspeak. That’s his little game. A big mouth that cries foul when it gets him in trouble.

Link to comment
<you quoted Sparky and said some stuff here>

 

I’m done answering this troll. He’ll get bored and leave sooner or later. I’ll still be here. Finding caches and participating in this game. I also won’t post his PM to me or forward it the Groundspeak. That’s his little game. A big mouth that cries foul when it gets him in trouble.

I forgot how we came to this point, so I reread the thread.

 

Turns out that Harrald, Sparky, and myself all agreed on the question posted in the thread. In fact, all on-topic posters agreed.

 

It turned ugly when BP posted an inflamatory, off-topic post. (He has since deleted his posts, but the text survives in the quoted replies.) I called him on it, so did Sparky.

 

BP and Harrald then piled on Sparky using the argument that he has only a few dozen finds and posts in the forums a bunch. BPs original post was never really substantiated, never was it explained how it relates to the thread, nor was I attacked as Sparky was. (Although I have received some pretty funny emails.)

 

In my opinion, the bottom line is this: If you want to bring up an issue that you think is a plague on the game, create a new thread. Don't tag your off-topic rant onto an unrelated thread posted by a new player.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...