Jump to content

New And Seperate Icon For Micro's


The Jedi
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I have only been caching for about three months, but it seems to me that it would be nice to have a totally separate icon for the micro's (or smaller) instead of the "traditional cache" green box lid icon!

Creating a different type of cache icon would make it easier for most people to know right away if it is a cache with just a log or a larger cache with other stuff inside! Then on your cache page you could track how many of the tiny caches you have found :D . This would help both those people who don't enjoy finding micros :wub: and those that really enjoy finding them :D .

I don't know if this would be possible. I just wanted to see what peoples' thoughts were on the subject.

Thanks,

Woodie

Link to comment

I think the more attributes (such as container size) that we could search on, the better.

 

However, there would be some issues to resolve. What exactly constitues "microness"? Is it the container size alone? I've seen some pretty small caches that still had trade items (such as coins or pins). If so, what size? I guess most would agree that film canisters are certainly micros. How about the 2x3x4" decon canisters? Those are pretty small, but maybe not micros. Though out in the woods they can be quite hard to find.

 

What about the "inside" size? The gc.com fake rocks are not small, but they certainly don't hold much. PVC containers can be quite long, but the opening isn't big enough for most trade trinkets.

 

Is it the fact that the cache only contains a log, and no trade items? That seems like a reasonable distinction. But then you'd probably want to make a new icon for "logbook only" caches, and size would be less relevant. It would probably lead to fewer traditional trading caches too, since having it's own category would probably encourage easier-to-place log-only caches.

 

What about multis that have some micros and some other parts?

 

Overall, I don't really care so much about the icon or separate category; but I do think we should be able to easily search for (and filter by) all sorts of attributes. These includes size, water caches, night caches, puzzle caches, etc.

Link to comment
But who's to say you couldn't reinvent micro as a cache type...

Because whether they’re a micro, regular, or large container size they are all the same type, traditional.

I never understood the arguement about the containers. Obviously micros are smaller, hence the name. Saying "The difference in the 2 is the size" is repetitive at the least.

 

For me, the difference between a traditional-regular and traditional-micro is more than just a difference in container size. The hunt/experience is vastly different in my opinion - and obviously in the opinion of many others - since this topic KEEPS coming up again and again (newbies and oldbies alike).

 

I support either a new cache type or new icon for Micros.

 

southdeltan

Link to comment

Edit: Looks like southdeltan beat me to the post. Sorry for the redundancy.

 

But who's to say you couldn't reinvent micro as a cache type...

Because whether they’re a micro, regular, or large container size they are all the same type, traditional.

This gecko is going to have to side with the other gecko.

 

You can filter them out if you don't or do like them. That's what PQ is for. A lot of people see them as a different cache type because caches with trade items are typically called traditional in the threads, and micro's refer to a container with just a log, and maybe some room for some coins. Even though there is this clear difference, they are the same cache type, just different sizes

 

The Size of that container determines if it is a micro-trad, or larger-trad (macro-trad if you will)

 

Traditional is defined as

 

Traditional Caches

 

This is the original cache type consisting of (at a bare minimum) a container and a logbook.  The cache may be filled with objects for trade. Normally you'll find a Tupperware-style container, ammo box, or bucket filled with goodies, or smaller container ("microcache") too small to contain items except for a logbook. The coordinates listed on the traditional cache page are the exact location of the cache. A container with just an object or codeword for verification may NOT be approved if the cache does not also include a logbook.

 

If it's not broken, don't fix it. There are simple ways to find or avoid micros. Personaly, I think the system works just dandy.

Edited by geckoee
Link to comment
For me, the difference between a traditional-regular and traditional-micro is more than just a difference in container size.  The hunt/experience is vastly different in my opinion - and obviously in the opinion of many others - since this topic KEEPS coming up again and again (newbies and oldbies alike).

The issue of "hunt/experience" relates to "difficulty" which is also included on the cache page.

Edited by greengecko
Link to comment

Most of the third party tools like watcher and gsak already have provisions for filtering by cache size, so this would really not add much in the way of function and might instead open the door for more trouble than its worth (just what size qualifies as micro, what about an icon for minis, extra-larges, ...) My $0.02.

 

edit: left out a critical not

Edited by katguy
Link to comment

The issue of "hunt/experience" relates to "Difficulty" which is also included on the cache page.

No, it does not. (That is not what I meant at all)

 

What I'm talking about has nothing to do with how hard it is to find. I'd say half of the micros I've found took me less than 5 minutes to locate. There were some that took over 30 minutes and a few I couldn't find. There have been ammo cans that fit all of those descriptions as well. I think the percentages of both are similar.

 

The size of a container doesn't automatically mean that it will be hard to find. There are an insane amount of throw-away micros out there. I'd say that most micros I've found have taken me similar amounts of time to find as traditionals (minus the hike time, if applicable).

 

The HUNT is totally different. The experience I have when searching for a micro (film cannister, waterproof match holder, magnetic keyholder, etc) is vastly different than the experience of hunting for a regular sized container. You don't look in the same types of places, you don't get the contents, they're harder to process (sign the log) without being seen - etc etc etc.

 

Using PQ's to sort is a cop-out in my opinion. I don't often (and I know I'm not alone, there are thousands upon thousands of geocachers) use PQ's to plan my trips.

 

A new icon wouldn't hurt anything and would simplify it for the many of us who find this to be problematic. It wouldn't require much work either (for those who claim - Jeremy should be working on something useful - you know ... the stuff *I* want).

 

southdeltan

Edited by southdeltan
Link to comment

Just how many times does this have to be discussed? Seems like at least once every month or two.

 

Micro is a SIZE, not a type.

 

Yes, the hunt is different because of size, but do we also need to break out the huge bookcrossing caches, too? I mean, the hunt is so different because the cache can be the size of a trunk.

 

~sheesh~ Stop confusing size with type!

Link to comment

As has been stated by several, a micro is a size, not a type. Are we going to have special icons for large caches as well?

 

But who's to say you couldn't reinvent micro as a cache type...

 

Changing things this late in the game will only confuse things. What do we do about the many thousands of caches already out there? We can't get owners to maintain their caches, let alone expect them all to go back and update their cache pages.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Actually I don't see a reason that we just don't have more icons. One more would suffice for now.

Let's look at the icon page:

http://www.geocaching.com/about/cache_types.aspx

It seems to me that the ONLY two types where size matters is traditional and multi and both of them have a cache container on them.

For now, if we had an icon for traditional/micro and an icon for traditional/non-micro what harm would it do? Sure, some old caches may be mislabeled, but they already are so what's the difference?

As far as I'm concerned I don't see the need to worry about cache size on multis or mystery caches right now as you don't know what to expect anyway. It may be a combination or something entirely different.

Link to comment

Actually, it looks like the major theme behind the "micro cache type" push is actually about trading. A lot of people like to trade and given that a lot of micros are too small to trade items of any significance the conclusion is to break off micros to different type.

 

If you're wanting to do something, identify the root and work from there.

 

Problem is, breaking off micros to another type doesn't solve the problem. While it would generally elimate non-trading caches from the traditional, you'll also be eliminating micro trading caches.

 

A much better solution for removing non-trading caches from your hunt is to create a non-trading cache type. Better yet, implement the attributes scheme and make it an attribute. Problem with that is attributes have been talked about for so long without anything moving forward that I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

Further, if you're going to have a non-trading cache type, you'll have to have two; one for non-trading traditional and non-trading multi.

 

But like Brain said, it wouldn't do a bit of good for a long time because you will have plenty of caches that are now mis-typed thus defeating the reason you made the change to begin with.

Link to comment

You all realize you can make our own maps with as many icons as you want right? Most map programs will allow you to do this. All you need is a program like GSAK to filter them the way you want.

 

The maps I create are more usefull to me because they are available offline and they contain the information I want in the area that I want.

 

Theres lots of fun things to do with mapping. Here's a simple map of my founds-

found.jpg

Both of them...

Link to comment
Actually, it looks like the major theme behind the "micro cache type" push is actually about trading. A lot of people like to trade and given that a lot of micros are too small to trade items of any significance the conclusion is to break off micros to different type.

 

But a lot of micros do have trade items. I've placed trade items in film canisters and smaller containers. Perhaps, instead of a micro icon, there should be one for logbook only caches? I'm not saying thats a good idea, but just thought I'd throw out something to add to the arguments. :D

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

:o Just some more small change... (2cents)

 

I'd really like to see a new icon for the micros ;) . There are simply people who want to only look for the large ;) caches (yep, that's me ;) and my team).

 

I think that if the owner of the micro calls it a micro... no matter the SIZE (film cannister or a 3" container)... it deserves it's own icon.

 

(maybe a microscope :P or something cute ;) ).

 

Premium Cachers :P have the opportunity to decide what kind of caches they want to map out... an icon is definitely needed if you simply do not do micros. :o

 

Anyone need change? WynterDreamz

Link to comment

1) I like looking for micros.

2) I often leave trade items in micros. Heck, I order trade items designed to leave in micros for the next person.

3) I would still like a different icon. Why?

_a) Micros are not exciting for my 4 year old son. I'd rather look for them when I can't be with him.

_:) Micros are a different kind of search. I look for different things in different places and most often at a very different height.

 

Honestly, the most popular cache type is the "traditional". There are probably more "traditional regular" and "traditional micro" then there are of all the other cache types combined (including "traditional other" and "traditional large"). Making one more item to split this group into two groups seems to make sense to me.

Link to comment
So are we saying that SIZE DOES MATTER?

Yes, size matters but it gets tricky when you try to apply a rule because that requires measurements which are represented by numbers. As we all know, its not about the numbers. So size matters until an actual measurement is made, then size doesn't matter because the 'not about the numbers' thing voids it out.

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...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...