Lame Caches

[+Fritz_Monroe]

I placed a cache that I'm starting to think is kinda lame. I mentioned to a friend that I was thinking about archiving it. He told me that it would take away the finder's finds if I archived it too soon. How soon is too soon? He thought that 90 days was the limit. Is that the right time frame? I don't want to void out someone's find.

 

F_M

[+Renegade Knight]

The finders keep their finds no matter when it's archived. The only reason to leave out a cache you don't like is so the locals can snag it before it's gone.

[+CacheCreatures]

Just curious, what makes you think it is lame?

[+Sparky-Watts]

Just curious, what makes you think it is lame?

Probably that crutch it uses to get around........

[+Bloencustoms]

I'd let it hang around for a while. You never know if there's someone who was planning to find it. You can always do something to improve the cache rather than give up on it entirely. Change the container to make it more difficult to find, or give the cache a theme to make it more interesting. It's hard to comment on it's possible "lameness" without actually visiting the cache. If it's your first hide and it follows the guidelines, lame is in the eye of the beholder. Let a few people find it, and you can take suggestions from the subsequent logs to improve that and any future caches you place.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

I placed a cache that I'm starting to think is kinda lame. I mentioned to a friend that I was thinking about archiving it. He told me that it would take away the finder's finds if I archived it too soon. How soon is too soon? He thought that 90 days was the limit. Is that the right time frame? I don't want to void out someone's find.

 

F_M

You've been reading the forums too much. There are a handful of forum users who's favorite word is lame.

 

It will be fine, relax.

[+JMBella]

If people are still regularly going after it then let it go. What's lame about it? Has anyone logged a TNLN DPM?

[+Mr.Benchmark]

Is it lame or just easy? Easy is OK - everyone has to start playing this game somewhere, and it may as well be your cache! Also, easy caches are often good for night caching.

 

If the contents of the cache have become rather poor, upgrade them. If the location is really unusually awful, maybe archive it - it's hard to do much about the location. If you think a better cache could be placed there, then maybe that's a reason to archive it.

 

But if you are worried enough about your cache to worry whether or not it's lame it most probably isn't. The lame ones I've found have all been the result of entropy, time, and absentee owners.

 

To my mind, if people are enjoying your cache - it's not lame.

[+Touchstone]

I was thinking the same thing about one of my urban micros. Then someone logged it and raved about it I'm not crazy about micros, but for my first few hides I thought they'd be easier to maintain being close to work/home. Boy, nothing could be further from the truth. I've had to replace my micros about three times as often as my regulars

[+briansnat]

Leave it. People love lame caches. I've placed a few myself on purpose. They get all the hits. Put some thought into into your contents, container and hide it in an interesting area, one that takes a little effort to get to, and you get a find every few months.

Edited February 6, 2004 by briansnat

[+Sparky-Watts]

Leave it. People love lame caches. I've placed a few myself on purpose. They get all the hits. Put some thought into into your contents, container and hide it in an interesting area, one that takes a little effort to get to, and you get a find every few months.

Well said. As usual, I will let Briansnat's post speak for me. He always says it better than I can, anyway!

[+Fritz_Monroe]

Thanks for all the comments. I'll leave it in place for a while and see what I think of it in the next couple months.

 

As for the cache itself. It's an urban micro. I put it in place and didn't get around to logging it that day. The next morning there was a new cache in the same general area. I went back and found it was .15 miles away from mine, so I listed it.

 

Now for why I think it's lame. The biggest reason is we have a parking lot with 2 micros within walking distance of each other. It's an alright hiding place, just not crazy about it being so close. Not a difficult hide, not one you have to be particularly stealthy to grab. It's just there.

 

Well anyway, it's staying in place for a couple months at least. Then I'll take a look and re-think it.

 

F_M

[+blazerfan]

I love having caches within easy walking distance of each other... that in no way makes a cache lame. I have found easy caches and I have found some hard ones... in my opinion "lame" is hiding a cache way out in the woods around no other caches with bad coordinates and no hints... everything else is just fine with me

[+Fritz_Monroe]

I like the close together caches too, but prefer urban micros to be a short drive to get. Now if these were both caches that required stealth, then it would be pretty decent.

 

BTW blazerfan, love the underpants gnome.

 

F_M