+boxerlovers Posted July 30, 2003 Share Posted July 30, 2003 I really don't understand why Virtual Caches of historical monuments (plaques) are not approved but they will approve a 'physical' cache that is nothing more than a small black film canister with a piece of paper in it to sign???? Before the ban on virtuals, I placed several and educational/historical statues or plaques and have gotten very good feedback on them. Boxerlovers Quote Link to comment
kite Posted July 30, 2003 Share Posted July 30, 2003 I think they were getting hard to control; you don't want EVERY bleedin' plaque along the highway to be a virtual cache, yet how do you judge which ones are appropriate, interesting enough, etc? If you can hide a micro near an interesting historical thing, people get to see it -- you could even use the marker as part of a clue for a multicache, just to make sure they read it -- and still incorporate the fun of the hunt. That's what I don't like about virtuals -- you can spot the plaque from hundreds of feet away. If it were an obscure little plaque that I had to hunt for, I'd be a lot more keen on it. My personal opinion, which others can and often do disagree with, is that geocaching is fundamentally about finding things that other people hid. It naturally branches off into finding things that other people simply find interesting, which is okay -- it's a big internet, room for plenty of games -- but I'd like to see it on a different count than physical caches. Quote Link to comment
Moun10Bike Posted July 30, 2003 Share Posted July 30, 2003 Kite is right on the money. Finding small black film canisters (or ammo boxes or what have you) is the root of what geocaching about - a hunt for the hidden. It was later on that virtual caches became a part of the fabric of the game. There are many good virtuals out there, but unfortunately also a lot of poorly thought-out ones. Because these take little time and effort for people to "hide," human nature meant that a huge glut of them started hitting soon after the first one was posted. Many included things that could be easily found via a web search, were not concrete objects with discrete coordinates (such as a ridgetop view), or were of little interest to the average geocacher. It was then that guidelines for virtuals had to be created. One of the main guidelines for virtuals (see here) is that they are reserved for spots where traditional caches are not possible. Even if there is not a spot for a physical hide in the immediate area of the target, there is usually always the possibility of making an offset or multicache out of it. Plaques and signs and such usually have numbers or letters that can be used to derive coordinates leading to a container hidden somewhere off-site. There is, by the way, no "ban" on virtuals. Rather, the guidelines were simply tightened such that a good argument must be made for why a "hard" cache cannot be placed there. If one cannot, then a virtual is usually approved. Without such restrictions, Geocaching.com becomes less of a geocache listing and more of a point of interest listing. Quote Link to comment
+boxerlovers Posted July 30, 2003 Author Share Posted July 30, 2003 Thanks for the responses - it's interesting to see others' perspective. I like both physical and virtual. The virtuals have usually taken me to an historic place where I learned something. I can't see a situation where a virtual would be approved because an 'offset' can be done anywhere so I'm not sure there is an explanation that would be acceptable. I don't particularly care for the film canisters with a piece of paper in them -- they are kind of 'down and dirty' caches also -- don't take a lot of effort on the hiders part. Thanks everybody for the responses! We're addicted to caching. Boxerlovers Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted July 30, 2003 Share Posted July 30, 2003 And yet, every bleedin plaque was placed there to commemorate something important enough to rate a plaque. And for some reason the plaque proposed to mark the original cache might very well rate a VC. Just doing my job as chief contrarian. This job will not provide me with my own plaque at all. The something commemorated has to actually mean something in the greater scheme of things. The truly nice thing about a plaque is that you don't need to make a dinky little log book for it. Quote Link to comment
+yumitori Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 To join Renegade Knight in the contrarian's box... Requiring a physical container when possible simply means that now 'EVERY bleedin' plaque' will now just have a film canister instead. Not every cache will be a difficult hunt, traditional or not. Can it be boring to drive up to a sign, read a couple questions, and move on? Yep. Can it be boring to drive up to a park, walk a couple feet, and lift up the rock and find the container? Yep. Both can be interesting and memorable as well. It's not the type of cache that makes them dull; it's the execution. Ron/yumitori --- Remember what the dormouse said... Quote Link to comment
Moun10Bike Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 I completely agree that execution is what separates a good cache from a poor one. However, the core source of disagreements over virtuals stems from different ideas about what constitutes a cache in the first place. The owners of Geocaching.com have decided that this site is primarily about finding hidden containers using GPS. They have decided that it is not about listing every point of interest that someone happens across. Quote Link to comment
+verbumsap Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 I tried to post 2 virtuals in West Texas where geocaching is just starting to take off. With so few in the wide spread area, I thought it would really help, but NO! Not even after pleading my case. Oh well, I'll get over it. Afterall, I love geocaching! Verbumsap-----Lady Laurel, MD Quote Link to comment
Zaphod Beeblebrox Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Moun10Bike:Finding small black film canisters (or ammo boxes or what have you) is the root of what geocaching about - a hunt for the hidden. It was later on that virtual caches became a part of the fabric of the game. That's an interesting comment and presents the perfect opportunity for one of the MARKWELLIANS to post links for the first film canister microcache and the first virtual cache. quote:Originally posted by Moun10Bike:The owners of Geocaching.com have decided that this site is primarily about finding hidden containers using GPS. They have decided that it is not about listing every point of interest that someone happens across. Virtual caches are still being approved, so I guess TPTB aren't as opposed to them as your post suggests. It might also be interesting to compile and compare lists of the best/lamest virtual caches and best/lamest microcaches and the number of finds logged to each as a gauge of what the geocaching public wants and prefers. Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 There are two kinds of execution. Cache. Where the cache placer makes you have a good time in spite of your best efforts. Attitude. Where you have a good time regardless of the cache. You never know when the stars are going to line up on something you are doing and make it solid gold. It's best to go in prepared to have a good time. Quote Link to comment
Moun10Bike Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Zaphod Beeblebrox: Virtual caches are still being approved, so I guess TPTB aren't as opposed to them as your post suggests. Don't get me wrong, there is no ban on virtuals and yes, they are still being approved. However, the guidelines have been tightened on them so that there has to be a good rationale for why a virtual at a given location rather than a traditional. If you find that your virtual has been archived, it doesn't mean that it can't and won't be approved - work with your admin to arrive at a solution that makes the cache acceptable. Quote Link to comment
+erik88l-r Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 I second what Moun10bike says. Virtual caches have their place - the admins just want to make sure they stay there. Seriously, the site would like to get back to its roots of being a repository of geocaches and the story of those who find them. There is nothing wrong with being a database of interesting locations - that's why www.waypoint.org is out there as an alternative. We'll happily post virtual caches if they meet the guidelines. At the risk of boiling those guidelines down too far, a virtual cache has to be in a location where you can't put a physical cache and it has to be something that makes the finder say "WOW!!!". If your historic plaque makes people say "WOW!!!" because it commemorates something so unexpected, unique, and compelling I guess it should be posted. Just understand that just because it makes you say "WOW!!!" it may not be enough. You may have to convince the cache approver that it meets those posted guidelines. erik - geocaching.com admin Quote Link to comment
+9Key Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 The Historical Marker debate is a hot one here in Texas. quote:verbumsap wrote:2 virtuals in West Texas The problem here in Texas is that there are more than 11 thousand historical markers in the state. The full text of every marker is available on this site. There is even a book available with all of the markers' text. Note that the book's title is "Why Stop?". Yes, the markers were placed because there was some historial event nearby that warranted the marker in the first place, but if the location and its text are readily available on both the Net and in print, is this geocaching? I think not. Can you hear me, Major Tom? Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 I liked the locationless historical marker cache for Nevada. Once cache covered them all. Then all the admins can say "Your sign is covered with this here cache." Quote Link to comment
+verbumsap Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 The problem here in Texas is that there are more than 11 thousand historical markers in the state. Yes, I understand that, but one that I wanted to post was the newly built drive-in theater. Not a historical marker. There was no place to put a microcache, as you had suggested, unless it would have been inside the compound. Then, all cachers would have had to pay to see the movies and the times that it is open is restricted to sunset and later. I apologize for letting it bother me. I did not realize that there was a big halt on virtuals. I am not "harping" on the subject. Just wanted someone to listen to me gripe! Typical female! Sorry 9Key. Verbum Sap-----Lady Laurel, MD Quote Link to comment
+erik88l-r Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 quote: I liked the locationless historical marker cache for Nevada..... Ditto for Georgia. When LC's come back Renegade Knight can do this for the other 48 states and we'll have all historical markers in the US covered. Or just resurrect this one ~erik~ Quote Link to comment
+*gln Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 quote:I wanted to post was the newly built drive-in theater. You wanted to make a drive-in a cache?? That would have to be one humdinger of a spectacular drive in. Well, I guess everything is bigger in Texas but... a drive-in?? Isnt there a way to offset from the spectacular theater to a park or a bush some place within a reasonable distance to hise a micro thing? That has worked for me in the past. Then, you get to have folks see the place then move off to find something. Whats playing today, anything good?? gln Quote Link to comment
Keystone Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 Newly built drive-in theatre? While that's unusual nowadays, if I wanted to find out about this I would look in the movie listings of the newspaper or a local website, not on geocaching.com. That's because a drive-in movie theatre is a commercial establishment. The commercial nature of your proposed virtual is a second reason for it to be denied. Sorry, but we see lots of these every week: favorite pizza shop, favorite ice cream store, etc. With narrow exceptions like NPS property, it is an uphill battle to get these items approved as virtual caches: Historical markers Statues and Monuments Commercial establishments Tombstones, Crypts, etc. The first or oldest [fill in the blank] in [name of town] benchmarks or survey markers On the other hand, each of these items can supply numbers that make for a dandy multicache starting point. I really appreciate the hiders who take my advice, and turn their virtual cache into an interesting multicache that features the subject of their archived virtual. Just approved two of those this evening and it made my day. They are really nice caches, and better quality than just the virtual on its own. -------------------- Saving the day and approving all the caches... before bedtime! Quote Link to comment
Max Cacher Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 I would like to see the topic pinned to the top it answers all the questions about why most lame or uninteresting virtuals can’t be approved. Tennessee Geocacher Geocaching.com Approver Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted July 31, 2003 Share Posted July 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by ~erik~:When LC's come back Renegade Knight can do this for the other 48 states and we'll have all historical markers in the US covered. Or just resurrect this http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC402F&Submit6=Find ~erik~ Well Cache Gack. Even I have limits! Quote Link to comment
+Mopar Posted August 1, 2003 Share Posted August 1, 2003 quote:Originally posted by verbumsap:I tried to post 2 virtuals in West Texas where geocaching is just starting to take off. With so few in the wide spread area, I thought it would really help, but NO! Not even after pleading my case. Oh well, I'll get over it. Afterall, I love geocaching! Verbumsap-----Lady Laurel, MD If you live in Laurel, MD, why were you placing caches of any type in Texas? Sounds like they should have been turned down under the rules against vacation caches. "(Mopar is) good to have around and kick. Like an ugly puppy" - Jeremy Quote Link to comment
+Team DEMP Posted August 1, 2003 Share Posted August 1, 2003 I've done a few virtual caches in my "newbie" (less then 50 found) start and I have to say that the ones I have done have all been fun. I do geocaching with my kids and taking a break in between hikes is helpful to prevent whining and hitting a virtual up (especially a drive-by or short walk) is helpful. In all cases, the kids and I enjoyed them and in some cases learned and continued discussing some aspect of the find. I'm sure there are folks like targeting 3/3 difficulty or higher caches, and that's great, but in order to provide the most enjoyable experience for everyone, I don't see any harm (and would even encourage) virtual caches and ones that don't require 2+ hours to find. It's not about increasing your find count, but it's about having fun for an extended period of time. We're off in October for an annual Disney trip and I'm already starting to look for what we can do IN the parks so I hope some additional virtual caches show up to provide even added fun to the "Disney Magic". David Quote Link to comment
+verbumsap Posted August 1, 2003 Share Posted August 1, 2003 quote: If you live in Laurel, MD, why were you placing caches of any type in Texas? Because both places are home, with neither being "vacation". Like I said, I'm over it. I'll not do virtuals anymore. Verbumsap------Lady Laurel, MD & Lubbock, TX Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.