Jump to content

Locationless Caches


Recommended Posts

I'm under the understanding that there is more or less a "hold" on the creation of new Locationless (Reverse) Caches. Existing caches are ok though.

 

I heard from a friend of mine that there may be some policy changes coming that will see the return of Locationless caches.

 

Is this true? I hope it is :D 'cuz it's a great way to cache even when the weather won't permit it.

 

Over the last couple weeks, I've been on the road a lot and seen some "finds" that put a little spice in the drive. I'd like to see more come.

Link to post

Funny to me that this came up tonight. I was just looking at locationless caches and trying to figure out how to keep track of all of the subjects in them in case I see something on the road that would fulfill a locationless cache. If anybody has any idea on the easiest way I could do that, please let me know.

 

My question is this......don't get me wrong, I like the idea of locationless caches and intend on doing some. You find the subject of the cache, take a pic of it with your GPSr and log it as a find. You don't even need to use a GPS or co-ordinates to do locationless caches. I could use a broken GPS and still log locationless caches...lol

So, what is their purpose in relation to geocaching? How did they get started? Why are people doing them?

 

I hope if they don't come back to GC.com, they at least get started on their own seperate website.

Link to post

locationless list

 

Here it is.......

 

And locationless has been on hold for quite awhile, with no word as to when or if it will start up again... :D

 

And yes you do need to use your GPS...most locationless require you to have a picture of them with the subject in your log, and also the coordinates of the subject.

Edited by woof n lulu
Link to post
Funny to me that this came up tonight. I was just looking at locationless caches and trying to figure out how to keep track of all of the subjects in them in case I see something on the road that would fulfill a locationless cache. If anybody has any idea on the easiest way I could do that, please let me know.

This site has them organized by subject, and has descriptions for the time or number based ones as well.

 

edit: sorry, it has them listed by subject, which is organized alphabetically.

Edited by DavidMac
Link to post
locationless list

 

Here it is.......

 

And locationless has been on hold for quite awhile, with no word as to when or if it will start up again... :D

 

And yes you do need to use your GPS...most locationless require you to have a picture of them with the subject in your log, and also the coordinates of the subject.

You can, of course, print out the locationless list to carry with you in your vehicle... ;)

Link to post
I am new to locationless caches and just need to know how to upload the pictures of the finds to the cache site. I have no idea how to do this and can find no instructions anywhere. Help!

Basically it is the same as logging a regular cache.

Then you go to the page after you have posted, and there will be the link to upload a picture....just follow the link.

Link to post
I've always liked them and never understood others' problems with them.

Many of them are crap. Frankly, they are...

 

"Take a photo of your GPS in front of your local pizza restaurant", "take a photo of your GPS in front of a car"... and so on...

 

There is a few really really good ones... They require you to do some serious searching, and you might even not have one nearby anyway. For example the Baltimore fish or what it is called...

 

And yes, we have done about 100 LC, but many of them are not that good.. So I would like to see better LCs...

Edited by hedberg
Link to post
I've always liked them and never understood others' problems with them.

Many of them are crap. Frankly, they are...

 

"Take a photo of your GPS in front of your local pizza restaurant", "take a photo of your GPS in front of a car"... and so on...

 

There is a few really really good ones... They require you to do some serious searching, and you might even not have one nearby anyway. For example the Baltimore fish or what it is called...

 

And yes, we have done about 100 LC, but many of them are not that good.. So I would like to see better LCs...

Crap? Then why on earth did you do them if you thought they were going to be crap? With locationless you know before hand what you are expected to find, unlike a traditional cache. You really didn't have to take a single picture outside of a pizza joint or car or ect ect if you didn't want to.

Link to post

As with any other cache, to each thine own....

 

My children have a blast with locationless caches. I carry 3 or 4 items that they have to find while we drive around. This is alot more fun for them then the old 'penny for each horse' game when your nowhere near a ranch.

 

Some people live in areas where the caches:

1) have all been done

2) require 13 miles round trip hike

3) require 17 miles bike ride

4) require 2,000 foot elevation gain in .25 miles

 

Locationless caches are something that those who chose to can search for. I am proud of almost all of our locationless finds. I think the people who are complaining the most are also the stat watchers and they dont think people have to work hard enough to get in the 'insert top number here'.

 

My children still call out every single yellow jeep and american flag we see.

 

I will support locationless caches if given a chance.

Link to post

I have 5 Locationless and have found them to be more of a challenge and more fun than most micro caches in my area. I have 4 more that have been previously logged so I have to wait to find another. I would like to see them return. I see people complaining about them being "stupid" but many other types of caches could fit that statement. I like a variety, depending on my mood. The more caches the better, I can decide for myself what is a worthy find.

Link to post

I do enjoy the locationless cache. They could almost be called "surprise" cache because I'm always surprised when I see something and think "hey, that's a locationless cache" and pull out the digital camera and mark the location. It makes a trip to anywhere a cache adventure.

 

That's what I like about them. That said, yes, some are not all that challenging - but to each his own. If I'm not into it, I don't do it. Others are into it, and they do. So be it.

 

I think whomever reviews and approves the cache has to have some kind of standard that weeds out the rediculas, but a well done locationless cache can serve many purposes.

 

I recently became aware of a locationless cache that involved historic sites and it became an excuse to go revisit one of my favorite places (Dundurn Castle) and share the beauty and history of this place with other cachers. That was great.

 

And isn't that what caching is all about?

Link to post
..I heard from a friend of mine that there may be some policy changes coming that will see the return of Locationless caches.

 

Is this true?...

It's been true for about a year or more. It will probably be true for another year. Give or take. GC does projects, not deadlines. "Workin on it" could be the GC motto.

Link to post
and share the beauty and history of this place with other cachers. That was great.

 

And isn't that what caching is all about?

Actually, no that's NOT what geocaching is about. What you mention is just a fortunate side effect that is the main reason many of us continue to seek out new caches week after week.

 

The very first geocache in the world was a lame roadside cache full of mostly junk (the more things change, the more they stay the same, huh?).

The whole reason behind hiding it was for people to search for something with their GPS, not to see a pretty view, or learn about history.

 

Obviously there are many cachers (most?) who care nothing about "the beauty and history" aspect. Just look at all the drive up geocaches out there. Heck, I've hid them myself, and they see more visits in a month then the good ones see in a year. It has to mean that most people just want to search for stuff, they don't want long hikes or history lessons.

 

Since locationless caches are the aspect of geocaching that is furthest removed from the idea of using a gps to find stuff, they are probably lowest on the LONG list of things planned for this website.

Link to post

Well, since this has turned into a debate on the merits of locationless caches...

 

My take on the subject is that I would much rather see folks place a physical cache near their Cool Thing, then lots of cachers get to visit it rather than the one person who gets to log it as a locationless.

 

For example, I did so on this cache rather than claim the carillon locationless. Now lots of folks can visit this somewhat rare musical instrument.

Link to post

No. There are no policy changes that I know of that will reintroduce locationless caches on the web site in the near future. The concept still has merit but the current implementation (one subject to find, 1->infinity logs) is poor. Until we can apply adequate time and resources to do it right, it still sits on the drawing board. 2x traffic every year on the traditional activity of geocaching tends to shift resources.

 

As I've indicated before, if there is such a high demand for it I'm surprised some savvy developer hasn't created something sooner that can cater to this apparently large community. Seems like a great opportunity for someone to cut their own niche in the world of geolocational entertainment.

Link to post

As I've indicated before, if there is such a high demand for it I'm surprised some savvy developer hasn't created something sooner that can cater to this apparently large community. Seems like a great opportunity for someone to cut their own niche in the world of geolocational entertainment.

Navicache?

Terra Cache?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Link to post
...Terra Cache?...

Workin on it.

That would be a great use of Terra Caches resources and a way to really jump in there and serve the community. Keep us posted RK. Looking froward to being able to post a locationless on your site.

Edited by CO Admin
Link to post
...Terra Cache?...

Workin on it.

That would be a great use of Terra Caches resources and a way to really jump in there and serve the community. Keep us posted RK. Looking forward to being able to post a locationless on your site.

Well, I don't have too many to submit, but I've got plenty I can log if the existing ones could be set up there. I haven't logged a ton, or only logged them as notes, because of the current setup here.

Wonder if Jeremy would help move the listings here over to Terra Cache?

Link to post

Ok, I'm dense. I don't get the Chirping Crickets reference. I followed the link through Amazon, and I still didn't get it.

 

I think there's a black hole forming around me......???

 

PS - Too bad on the Locationless. Geocaching.com is THE scorecard. I'm not too interested in doing something on another system.

Link to post

PS - Too bad on the Locationless. Geocaching.com is THE scorecard. I'm not too interested in doing something on another system.

Why not????????

You would still get to chase down locationless caches that involved historic sites and become excuses to go revisit your favorite places (like Dundurn Castle) and share the beauty and history of these places with other cachers. And isn't that what caching is all about?

 

Or perhaps it really IS all about logging a smiley on geocaching.com..........

Link to post

Of course it's both. Some see it as being competitive (although I'm not in that boat) - "How many finds do you have?".

 

Having said that, geocaching.com is the leader in caching activities. It's the one site that everyone is on. It's the focal point in all caching related activities - event caches, etc. It's comperhensive. All caching activities go through here. Having it spread across other sites will only result in "some caches listed here, some there" - a very watered down listing.

 

There's several sites that promote other GPS-like activities that I'm not interested in either. I much prefer the "one stop shopping approach".

Link to post

I'm like an wild animal, I'm hunt for anything. I need to hunt... Therefor I hunt even bad things. :D

 

No, seriously, locationless caches are fun. We really like them. But we think that a lot of them should had be done differently (read: been a little bit more challenging).

Link to post
I'm like an wild animal, I'm hunt for anything. I need to hunt... Therefor I hunt even bad things. :D

 

No, seriously, locationless caches are fun. We really like them. But we think that a lot of them should had be done differently (read: been a little bit more challenging).

I agree with you - I've seen some that are what I would consider a bad idea, others that just grabbed my interest.

 

A friend of mine mentioned one that caused system problems because of all the logs it generated - locating yellow jeeps (or something like that).

 

There has to be a better way of doing it, and some reasonable standards applied.

 

I heard a rumour that a positive change was coming more sooner than later and I was just curious if it was true or not - apparently it isn't.

Link to post
PS - Too bad on the Locationless. Geocaching.com is THE scorecard. I'm not too interested in doing something on another system.

{RANT pt2}

 

If you REALLY enjoy locationless caches, GC.com is most def NOT "the scorecard" as you say. It's a great idea, with a HORRIBLE implementation here. I thought the "American Flag" locationless was as lame as lame gets. Then I saw this flag:

1244880_200.JPG

 

Very cool, and worthy of a log. Problem is, there is no way in hell to tell if it's been logged already (turns out it has, I mentioned it to another cacher who pointed to her log on it). There are well over 1000 logs on that page. Unless I read every one, I have no idea. Because no two cachers will ever get the exact same coords, how else can I tell? You can't.

The system here on GC.com sucks for people who actually enjoy these. The only reason for wanting them to stay like they are is because it's a good way to boost the find count. I'm sure if I can't check if my flag is on the American Flag cache page already, neither can the cache owner.

 

If you REALLY do LCs because you enjoy them, you would much rather have a better setup then worry about if they count here on gc.com.

Link to post

When we are searching for already logged LCs, do we search for the word "Sweden". It is important that the fellow cachers here write that in their log, "I found this one just outside the city of X, Sweden" or something like that.

 

It is not possible to scan manually thru 500 logs to see if there might be some there.

Link to post
Of course it's both. Some see it as being competitive (although I'm not in that boat) - "How many finds do you have?".

 

Having said that, geocaching.com is the leader in caching activities. It's the one site that everyone is on. It's the focal point in all caching related activities - event caches, etc. It's comperhensive. All caching activities go through here. Having it spread across other sites will only result in "some caches listed here, some there" - a very watered down listing.

 

There's several sites that promote other GPS-like activities that I'm not interested in either. I much prefer the "one stop shopping approach".

Ahh, but most people would say LCs aren't technically geocaches. Geocaches are fixed objects that occupy defined, static locations. Someone posts the long/lat, and u use a GPS to navigate to that location, and find the object.

Virtuals and Benchmarks also work that way. Not Locationless. Those are a whole different game.

There are many other GPS games hosted on other sites, many like geodashing and MinuteWar are quite popular too.

This website is the undisputed leader when it comes to geocaching. It is NOT the leader when it comes to other GPS games, and there is no reason another site like Terra Cacher couldnt easily become the leader in scavenger hunt style GPS games.

Link to post
....The system here on GC.com sucks for people who actually enjoy these. The only reason for wanting them to stay like they are is because it's a good way to boost the find count. I'm sure if I can't check if my flag is on the American Flag cache page already, neither can the cache owner.

 

If you REALLY do LCs because you enjoy them, you would much rather have a better setup then worry about if they count here on gc.com.

I partially agree with you.

 

In many cases it's hard to tell if something's been logged or not. You're right that two co-ordinates will never be the same.

 

And yes, a better system / method is required to manage this - I don't think I could properly define what the best solution is.

 

And yes, I'm sure some people only do them because they're looking to push up their "find count". But how does this compare to other "legit" caches like Event Caches? You show up at a spot and have a coffee / beer with some fellow cachers and go home and log it??

 

I just see it as a different twist on caching. No better or worse than some of the other variations to the traditional cache.

Link to post

In our cases, it isn't that easy. Try to find a yellow Jeep in Sweden with gas prices about $5.44 per gallon :D

 

I am still looking for a totem pole, have searched for it about 8 months now!

 

LC's like "My favourite football stadium" (or what is called?) are way too easy.

 

Also, finding any fire truck anywhere in the world... :D

 

But, if you were supposed to look for a fire truck that isn't red, then it is a little bit more challenging...

 

But I'm not sure what's gonna happen if GC.com allowed locationless caches again, I think we would get several thousands new caches the first couple of days. A few very good ones, and a lot of stupid ones...

 

My suggestion/solution to GC.com is: Allow locationless caches, but approve only the good ones.

Link to post
In our cases, it isn't that easy. Try to find a yellow Jeep in Sweden with gas prices about $5.44 per gallon :D

 

I am still looking for a totem pole, have searched for it about 8 months now!

 

LC's like "My favourite football stadium" (or what is called?) are way too easy.

 

Also, finding any fire truck anywhere in the world... :D

 

But, if you were supposed to look for a fire truck that isn't red, then it is a little bit more challenging...

 

But I'm not sure what's gonna happen if GC.com allowed locationless caches again, I think we would get several thousands new caches the first couple of days. A few very good ones, and a lot of stupid ones...

 

My suggestion/solution to GC.com is: Allow locationless caches, but approve only the good ones.

Here in Canada, gas prices aren't much better. :)

 

I think you've hit the nail right on the head. Some are silly. Others are well done. And yes, it would be great if we can GC.com only approved the good ones.

 

But as you know, the problem is this - how do we define rules that will consistantly approve "good ones". Because I'll be the folks that put out these easy ones are thinking theirs were good ones.

 

It's like trying to legislate common sense. Good luck. Everyone's definition if different.

Link to post

There are well over 1000 logs on that page. Unless I read every one, I have no idea..... Because no two cachers will ever get the exact same coords, how else can I tell? You can't.

 

Edit/find on page <enter> does it everytime if you search by some other identifying feature - EG "Your city" I just search for "MN" on any locationless and see what comes up- pretty easy to identify any other finds in the state, city you seek.

And if it is something specific in your city you can also search on the name of the actual object. Not the biggest hurdle, but still a problem. . .

 

and there is no reason another site like Terra Cacher couldnt easily become the leader in scavenger hunt style GPS games.

 

except many of the links are not working (yet) Also keep in mind the resources needed to run gc.com. Hardware, software, storage, tech experts & volunteers (etc,etc) I have no idea, but chances are Terra Cacher doesnt have enough of those resources to pull it off - and wouldnt be able to start out with nothing, and hope to "keep up"

Look at everything that goes into gc.com - and the problems that still exist due to traffic.

 

I just see it as a different twist on caching. No better or worse than some of the other variations to the traditional cache.

 

Well said. To each his own, right - Live and let live?

 

I also agree that far to many "not so good" ones were approved- diluting the pool -

I stick to the "if you dont like it, dont do it" thought- but overall enjoy them

 

Counts? I dont care much about the numbers- If I did - I would have hit all of the hundreds and hundreds of caches within 10 miles of my house. I dont because I dont see any value in going to places that I am already familiar with or feel arent really interesting to begin with- Or much worse- dont feel safe going to. Selectiveness is key.

 

(sorry, instead of replying, I edited your post. I reconstructed it for you - Jeremy)

Edited by Jeremy
Link to post

I started the geocaching.com site with a beat-up 486 machine and a dsl line. This isn't a very good excuse. If there was a demand for it, someone would have built it by now.

 

Besides, people always tell me I should be running Linux and MySql. Both are free. Show me how its done.

 

Also keep in mind the resources needed to run gc.com. Hardware, software, storage, tech experts & volunteers (etc,etc) I have no idea, but chances are Terra Cacher doesnt have enough of those resources to pull it off - and wouldnt be able to start out with nothing, and hope to "keep up"
Link to post

I'm not sure why the defense keeps coming up about whether locationless caches are worthy. It's a moot point. I said they have merit, but priority-wise they're not quite up there on the list.

Link to post

this variant of geocache, that is not real, these could decay the magic of find a cache.

 

I prefer to maintain the essence of locate treasures-

Edited by garri
Link to post
I started the geocaching.com site with a beat-up 486 machine and a dsl line. This isn't a very good excuse. If there was a demand for it, someone would have built it by now..

 

I should clarify - It was mentioned above (sorry, no time to dig) how IF someone else were to take over, moving the existing LC's (logs,etc) from GC.com to the new host would be ideal. I agree. My earlier comments assumed the "new" site would have to adopt this Pile-o-data, with all its technical responsibilities, needs and hit the ground running. I also assumed it would be equivilant to this site with its features, forums,etc.

 

In that sense, No 486 is going to cut it- but of course something on a smaller scale could be put together. I guess this place just gave me a certain standard.

 

Besides, people always tell me I should be running Linux and MySql. Both are free. Show me how its done.

 

That would be resources.

 

*Wanted* GC.com seeks Full time Linux/MySql codemaster to work for free in the quest for CacheNirvana.

 

Times are tight, and things work pretty good as is- so I wouldnt see a need to change (yet...?? guess we'll see)

 

Oh, and thanks for the edit- I missed it.

Link to post

I like locationless (and virtual!) caches as much as I like any other type of cache. It is useless to go on endlessly debating the merits of them. It seems like every time someone asks about them the naysayers HAVE to jump in and start the ball rolling. Why not just answer the question (or direct them to the pertinent part of the 'guidelines'), be done with it and move along? For me there are plenty of LC's on this site to keep busy for quite a while. When Jeremy gets to that part of the site it should be worth waiting for. On the other hand if they will definately NOT be back the carrot should stop being dangled in front of us.

Link to post

Locationless doesn't lessen the experience of finding a cache. I tend to not do them for awhile then I get a bug and do a couple. There are some that are fascinating and some that are rather ordinary. Then again there are some that started ordinary and are now legendary. The cache experience is what you make it. If locationless cause you to lose sleep and make that waterfall you just found less enjoyable, well...sorry.

 

Terricachers is an organization and it does have a mission. Our budget is hoovering at zero and will stay there for the immediate future. Part of our mission involves organizing the team that will actually make the first real guide to accessible geocaching right down to ratings. This project looks like it will be a success because there are interested people. There are other projects to be done.

 

As Jeremy said. GC didn't start with a big budget and massive bandwidth. It started with an idea, some enthusiasm, and persistence. Every cache site and organization that exists now will only thrive if there are people behind them with that same enthusiasm and persistence. Every other site that lacks those qualities no matter how well funded will wither and die.

Link to post
As I've indicated before, if there is such a high demand for it I'm surprised some savvy developer hasn't created something sooner that can cater to this apparently large community. Seems like a great opportunity for someone to cut their own niche in the world of geolocational entertainment.

 

keep in mind the resources needed to run gc.com......

 

I started the geocaching.com site with a beat-up 486 machine and a dsl line. This isn't a very good excuse. If there was a demand for it, someone would have built it by now.

 

You have made a great site, and cachers have flocked to it in large numbers.

Many have become premium memebers. This has obviously provided the resources needed to get where this site is today. Starting with nothing is possible, as you have shown but Locationless Caches were part of it when you started, or soon after. So a demand must have existed, or they never would have been included on the site. They became a burden, I can understand.

 

It's a moot point. I said they have merit, but priority-wise they're not quite up there on the list.

 

So someone else should do it? Anyone who wanted "in" on this whole racket would have to know that the #1 competition is This Site. Your statement above seems to me to indicate that its either wait until you get time/resources to do it, or someone else should do it, and good luck- it can be done? (but it'll always be compared to us)

 

I don't go around endorsing sites. The expectation is that you make whatever site you create yours. If you make a good site people will come.

 

Since I am not a premium member, I have no real expectations of how you run your site. I use it, and am alright with everthing. I can live with or without LC's, and be OK. However, it seems some users keep asking the question that started this thread. It seems youve given an answer, so I guess that should create yet another Markwell for someone to wait patiently to slap on the next person to ask.

 

If it could be finalized, and released as info on the main page or something it would save alot of repeat postings of this topic.

Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...