Jump to content

Two Finds -- One Hide


Followers 2

Recommended Posts

Recently I have seen several hides from noobs where the hider has just a handful of finds before placing a cache. I hesitate to name names here, but I can supply the caches on request. I really want this to look at the whole problem and not just the particular caches involved with my post.

 

One of them had some very good cachers looking and it now show three sets of coordinates on the page. One was the original listing. I have not been back to it to look with the new information.

 

Another came out first as a 1.5/1.5 with the only information being the fact that the cache container was a tupperware container. Someone with 14 finds was the FTF. That find was on the page the first time I looked at it. Since that find myself and two other cachers have come up short. I could not get any closer than 280 feet. After Og could not find it, the description was changed to make it a 2/3 and a note was added that the last 100 feet were off trail.

 

The third showed up this morning. I was able to be FTF on it, but the coordinates were off 85 feet. The container was a round Igloo beverage jug in it's glorious red and white colors. It was just laid behind a tree near a side trail and was very visible to anyone who might try to find an out of the way spot. There was no way to hide it any better.

 

The logs on the first one indicate that it will probably not last long as it is just too available to people other than cachers. The last one is a plunder asking to happen.

 

My question is not only why people with little experience hide caches like this, but should reviewers be a bit more careful with hiders that have only a few finds? And if so, what kind of limit should be put on how many finds is enough?

Link to comment

there are two ways to look at this, they might place new caches in a new, different and interesting way, not just an ammo can under some rocks or a altoids tin under the skirt of a light pole, they dont have anything to copy so they are forced to come up with the idea themselfs

 

then the other side is as you are saying, they might place a cache stupidly

 

I dont think that making a limit is a good idea, because we dont want to shove away new cachers, or prevent the first thing I mentioned from happening. Also some people dont log their finds online, which would make a limit hard to do. It all comes down to the reviewer should email a cachers who submitted a cache with a very vauge or non-existant discription, and should be hesitent of approving a cache without a description.

Link to comment

It seems obvious to me that these people are not forum readers either. I have only 25 finds right now and will be placing my first cache next weekend but I've had enough finds to figure out how others hide and rate thier own caches. I understand how people who are new to geocaching could be overly excited to participate in all aspects of the game but I feel there should be a minimum find before placing or atleast some correspondance between approvers and people with few finds to get a better feel if the person hid it properly.

Link to comment

I placed my first cache after 1 find. The only thing I've learned since was that I didn't have to put so much thought into the container, contents and location. Had I found a bunch before hand, my first might have been a Gladware container in a dog poop park, filled with broken McToys.

 

Instead, in my naivety, I filled the container with neat stuff and found a beautiful spot for it at the end of a nice hike. 2 1/2 years later its still there and I consider it to be the equal of any other cache I've placed.

 

A newbie won't be influenced by the "style of the area" and could often contribute something new and interesting. This can be a breath of fresh air, particularly where log only micros in film canisters are the predominant type of cache in a region, placed by the "veterans".

 

I've seen great caches placed by newbies and some of the lamest, or most poorly thought out caches I've seen were placed by people with hundreds of finds.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

My first was after only a few finds (if not one). Looking back with 20/20 hindsight I still like that spot. I checked on the cache at least once a week and enjoyed every single find posted for that cache more then than I do today.

 

Why kill someones enthusiasm for the RASH? Channel it instead. People want to give back, it should be easy to do so and should not result in a backlash. Everyone has to go through the same mistakes we all made. You can speed the evolution with guidance but you can't stop that they have to go through all the process.

Link to comment

The volunteer reviewers already do what they can to be extra careful when a new geocacher is hiding a cache with just a few finds to their credit. Maps get looked at a bit closer, and funny-looking coordinates are more likely to be questioned. Cache descriptions are read more slowly. We're more likely to ask "does this have a logbook? You mentioned putting two pennies and a lottery ticket in your micro, but there was no mention of a logbook."

 

But there is no way that a reviewer can judge from their desktop whether a cache is hidden in a manner that is likely to be muggled very quickly. For example, I have seen many caches hidden in colored thermos containers that are very unlikely to be muggled, because they're totally concealed. Likewise, once I see from the cache page that the cache is hidden off trail in a county park, I usually can't tell whether the coordinates are 80 feet off.

 

There are a number of possible mitigants/solutions:

 

1. Add a RULE that says that a cache can't be hidden until you have X finds. Bad idea. I've found many one-hit wonder caches that were terrific hides. Or just imagine if BrianSnat had been "turned off" after reading that somewhat snobby barrier-like rule. His area would have missed out on dozens of great caches.

 

2. Add a RULE that says the proposed cache listing site must be inspected personally before it is listed. Bad idea. You think it takes too long to get a cache listed now?

 

3. Add a RULE that requires the hider to upload a photo of the cache in its hiding spot. Less objectionable than the other ideas, but not everyone has a digital camera or is patient enough to delay listing their cache until they can get a roll of film developed.

 

Yuck. More rules. Does anyone want more rules?

Link to comment

Just to be perfectly clear about this. I deliberately did not mention the word "rule" because I don't think we need more rules. I really don't have answers to this, but I will probably think twice before going after a cache where the hider has less than 20 finds. The best I could come up with myself is a suggestion on the "How to Hide a Cache" page that new hiders should try to have at least 20 finds so that they have an idea of what works and what doesn't. A note with that exceptions are gladly made when circumstances warrant them. An extension to that note would add that the hider with less than 20 finds should include a note to the reviewer giving details as to why this one should be an exception. I don't know if that would work or not. I certainly don't want to put extra work on our reviewers. Their job is tough enough already.

 

Edit: removed one word to make the statement clearer

Edited by WeightMan
Link to comment
Yuck. More rules. Does anyone want more rules?

 

I think the key is feedback. If people were critical of my first hides, I would have heeded the criticism and made adjustments

 

If you see something that is wrong with a hide it's a good idea to point it out, either in your log, or in a gently worded e-mail.

 

but I will probably think twice before going after a cache where the hider has less than 20 finds.

 

Then you would have missed out on this cache. They had two finds when they placed it and 3 months later have a whopping 8 finds. It's a great example of the kind of caches newbies can place. I don't think I've ever seen a cache that was so well received by the geocaching community.

 

Did they make some mistakes? Yeah, I thought so and mentioned it in the log, as did a few others. But the dire predictions of us veterans haven't come to pass yet and people are still finding this cache and still talking about it...and coming back to show their friends and families. You aren't going to see many caches with such glowing logs, no matter how many finds the hider has. And their two subsequent hides have also received raves.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
I know what you mean. this person is local to me and they have NO finds and 8 hides! WTF is up with THAT? I don't know why any of them got approved with zero finds.

 

Check this out! These people were either the best thing to happen (or the worst depending on who you talk to) to this area Team KFWB

 

here is their bio....

Biography:

TEAM KFWB GPS HAS BEEN ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN PLACING CACHES ALL OVER CALIFORNIA, NEVADA, OREGON, UTAH AND BRITISH COLUMBIA SINCE 1989. OUR INTRODUCTION TO THE GEOCACHING WEBSITE IN SEPTEMBER, 2002, HAS PROVIDED THE PERFECT VENUE FOR US TO SHARE OUR ONGOING FASCINATION WITH THIS SPORT. SINCE THEN, WE HAVE HAPPILY INDULGED OURSELVES CREATING WHAT WE HOPE, ARE THOUGHT PROVOKING, CHALLENGING, BUT ABOVE ALL, EXCITING CACHES FOR TEAMS TO ENJOY.

 

These people have put literally tens of 1000's of $ into their caches...

Sooooooooooooooo to say you shouldn't be able to put caches in until you get a certain amount found isn't right

Link to comment
I know what you mean. this person is local to me and they have NO finds and 8 hides! WTF is up with THAT? I don't know why any of them got approved with zero finds.

 

Check this out! These people were either the best thing to happen (or the worst depending on who you talk to) to this area Team KFWB

 

here is their bio....

Biography:

TEAM KFWB GPS HAS BEEN ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN PLACING CACHES ALL OVER CALIFORNIA, NEVADA, OREGON, UTAH AND BRITISH COLUMBIA SINCE 1989. OUR INTRODUCTION TO THE GEOCACHING WEBSITE IN SEPTEMBER, 2002, HAS PROVIDED THE PERFECT VENUE FOR US TO SHARE OUR ONGOING FASCINATION WITH THIS SPORT. SINCE THEN, WE HAVE HAPPILY INDULGED OURSELVES CREATING WHAT WE HOPE, ARE THOUGHT PROVOKING, CHALLENGING, BUT ABOVE ALL, EXCITING CACHES FOR TEAMS TO ENJOY.

 

These people have put literally tens of 1000's of $ into their caches...

Sooooooooooooooo to say you shouldn't be able to put caches in until you get a certain amount found isn't right

Since 1989???

Link to comment
exceptions are gladly made when circumstances warrant them

One prime example: a new cacher in a remote area that has very few existing (if any) caches. Someone new to the obsession may have placing caches as the only option while trying to build up a membership.

That's exactly what I was thinking. I'd hate to think I had to rack up 20 or so finds when the total distance to find them would be a vacation in itself.

Link to comment
I know what you mean. this person is local to me and they have NO finds and 8 hides! WTF is up with THAT? I don't know why any of them got approved with zero finds.

Um, the explanation is on the first page of their profile:

 

"this account is for caches hidden or maintained by Geo Ho and Mopar as a team. We log our finds under our individual accounts"

 

Attack more carefully next time.

Link to comment

Ummmm Torry..... You might want to just scroll up and read that one a bit more carefully.

LOL

 

 

I understand there are going to be cachers who live in areas with fewer caches, and they might be the ones who jump start the placements. But the problem I've seen are the '48 hr cachers'. In the span of 48 hours they've got their first find, placed their first cache and retired. How can this be prevented? It can't.

 

Wulf

Link to comment

Torry, you might want to check who you're quoting... :unsure::tongue::unsure:

 

One prime example: a new cacher in a remote area that has very few existing (if any) caches. Someone new to the obsession may have placing caches as the only option while trying to build up a membership. 

 

..........

 

That's exactly what I was thinking. I'd hate to think I had to rack up 20 or so finds when the total distance to find them would be a vacation in itself.

That's not the case where WeightMan was talking about (Seattle/Greater Puget Sound). I'm in the same area and have found everything out to about 7 miles from home; the closest unfound 500 from my home doesn't quite reach out to 20 miles. So we can't say that newbies are trying to build membership. I'm not saying this doesn't happen, just the example WM was using doesn't fit.

 

Yes, sometimes a new set of eyes sees things differently - a different way to hide a cache. But more often - in my experience - they 'fall back' on the hide-it-under-a-bush, behind-the-tree/rock/log, or other 'mundane' place. (I wish I could get back and try some of the exceptions listed above.) On the other hand, this can sometimes catch us 'experienced' cachers off-guard: looking in all the sneaky "good" places and miss the obvious.

Link to comment

IN your opening statement you said the cache waa off by 85 feet how do you determine who was off as a GPS is NOT an exacting instruement. I have been wondering how do you determine with great precison and accuracy where a cache is located, other then on top of a benchmark??? If i place a cache and my GPSr is off by 23ft and you come along and your GPSr is off by 23ft you may get lucky and the cancel or they may add and now your about 50ft from the cache.

I have just been wondering how do you get GOOD coordinates.

 

cheers

Link to comment

Before anyone goes off wanting to add rules to limit new cachers, did you ever think to offer some help? Guess not...

 

This cache was placed by a new cacher in our area. Read the logs. Almost every log heaps praises on the cache theme and also the way in which it was hidden. He thought of the ideas himself, only thing I did was tell him what I thought would not be a good idea.

 

After the rave reviews, he is enthused. Much better to have someone who is happy with the way the community is treating them than vice versa. Contact the individual, try to offer some suggestions in a COURTEOUS manner.

 

As for the reviewers, they have a lot on them just trying to please everyone by getting the caches approved in what most people think is a timely fashion. If they took the time to investigate every cache to its fullest, this topic would be "WHY THE HECK AINT MY CACHE APPROVED".

 

Read RK,briansnat and KA's posts. They nail it.

Link to comment
IN your opening statement you said the cache waa off by 85 feet how do you determine who was off as a GPS is NOT an exacting instruement. I have been wondering how do you determine with great precison and accuracy where a cache is located, other then on top of a benchmark??? If i place a cache and my GPSr is off by 23ft and you come along and your GPSr is off by 23ft you may get lucky and the cancel or they may add and now your about 50ft from the cache.

I have just been wondering how do you get GOOD coordinates.

 

cheers

I understand what you are saying with this. My problem is that the new hider did not. I might mention that the second finder on that cache also took coordinates and they were very close to mine. I got mine by averaging over about three minutes so they are relatively close. There is no way I can get perfectly accurate measurements with any measuring device (including a ruler), but we can do all we can to eliminate as much error as possible. From the log of the second finder, he was in the same area as I was before resorting to the hint, which was somewhat ambiguous.

 

I agree completely with CR. A new hider needs more information about getting a good reading on the coordinates. That is exactly the problem I am talking about here. The listing that CR referred to does not go into enough detail on how to get a good reading. People new to the sport (or whatever) tend to think that what the unit says is gospel. We all know it is not. I don't think I have found more than one or two caches with the GPSr reading 0.0. My suspicion is that they placed the cache and wrote down what the coordinates were on the unit and called it good. No, I don't know that, I just suspect that.

 

Yes, some new people have placed very good caches with very few finds. Yes, new people add spice to the mix with new ideas. I don't want to stifle that at all. I just think they need to learn how to use the machine first! :unsure::huh::tongue::unsure::(

Link to comment
I know what you mean. this person is local to me and they have NO finds and 8 hides! WTF is up with THAT? I don't know why any of them got approved with zero finds.

If you had to have a certain numbers of finds before a hide...the very first cache would not have been hidden.

 

I placed my first cache after only 2 finds and it received a lot of praise. There are people out the with hundreds of finds that can't hide a decent cache.

 

Lets face it. Hiding a cache is not rocket science. All it takes is a little common sense and some imagination. Unfortunately, no matter how many finds you have, it won't give you common sense or imagination.

 

El Diablo

Link to comment
The listing that CR referred to does not go into enough detail on how to get a good reading.

 

Really? It is a lot more complex than what I go through to get my coordinates. What more could they add? I think it's too much.

 

Lets face it. Hiding a cache is not rocket science. All it takes is a little common sense and some imagination. Unfortunately, no matter how many finds you have, it won't give you common sense or imagination.

 

Bingo!!!!

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Well, Brian, we all know you have that perfect GPS that needs no averaging--just click and go. :tongue: Unfortunately, mine won't do that. And as by evidenced by coords sometime 100' off, there are others' that won't either.

 

While hiding a cache is not rocket science, what about tips like:

 

"As you walk away from your cache, turn around and look to see if you can see it."

 

"Can you see your cache from the trail?"

 

"Is the cache in a place that is likely to be accidently found by someone not playing the game?"

 

"Will your hiding material stay put through a hard rain?"

 

"Make sure you can return to your cache using your coordinates alone."

 

"Is your container easy enough to securely close and return to its hiding spot that people will actually do it?"

 

"Will your container stay closed if you drop it on the ground?"

 

The list goes on and on of little tidbits of helpful information. Stuff that might actually sink in and be stored until such time that it pops back up at the right time.

 

[EDIT: forgot the smilie]

Edited by CoyoteRed
Link to comment
Well, Brian, we all know you have that perfect GPS that needs no averaging--just click and go.

 

That's exactly what I do, and in 80 hides, I've had complaints about the coords of 2 caches....and one of those I averaged. I averaged the first 5 or 6 because I didn't know any better.

 

Yes, I guess some of the other tips you have there could help, but most of it is common sense.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

hey, my worst coords were the ones i averaged. i now prefer to use one, but check it against other data for accuracey.

 

anyway, some of THE BEST caches in my area are by hiders with no finds. granted, we think the hiders are sockpuppets for real cachers, but there it is.

 

and it isn't really about how many finds you have. it's about the thought you put into it. so go ahead, hide a nice ammo box full of good stuff in an imaginative way in a nice place before you bother to find any.

 

think twice before you toss a cheap gladware with some post-its and broken mctoys under a bush, even if you have thousands of finds.

Link to comment
I know what you mean. this person is local to me and they have NO finds and 8 hides! WTF is up with THAT? I don't know why any of them got approved with zero finds.

Um, the explanation is on the first page of their profile:

 

"this account is for caches hidden or maintained by Geo Ho and Mopar as a team. We log our finds under our individual accounts"

 

Attack more carefully next time.

um...I hope the pigs post is a joke :tongue:

Link to comment

Personaly I think that learning to hide a cache is a whole different aspect of the game than finding caches. A person really doesn't know what is involved in hiding a cache until they hide one no matter how many finds they have. Ergo mistakes will be made and they will learn and it's all good. The first time one of their caches goes missing they'll either quit or get better.

 

The difference between learning to hide and learning to find is that hiding is obviously so much more public. How many of us remember thinking "ah, only 300 yards to go, thats close enogh to leave the trail and head for the cache." Only to learn Rule #1. Never leave the trail until you have to, it's just not worth it. At least that is a rule on the north coast, (and in Arizona odly enough. Where there are no bushes and it just doesn't look like bush wacking until it is too late.) Or what about the cache you stood ontop of for half an hour before giving up only to find it right there another time. Which is Rule #2 When approaching area use the force and observe. (Or some such zen as works for you) Or DNF a cache that you spent two hours on but didnt have the cache page with you, only to get home to learn that it was a multi. I think Rule #3 needs no introduction (maybe it should be Rule #1)

 

Good thing those incidents weren't so public as hiding a cache or some of us would have died of embarassment.

 

I think it is up to the individual to decide to hunt a newbies cache. Could be great, could suck, coords could be way off, could be a DNF cause your front tire is parked on the cache. People hide cache because they want to give to the game. The least we can do is give back to them and also to the game by giving them feedback in our logs.

 

Have I really been talking that long?

Edited by WCoaster
Link to comment
Personaly I think that learning to hide a cache is a whole different aspect of the game than finding caches. A person really doesn't know what is involved in hiding a cache until they hide one no matter how many finds they have. Ergo mistakes will be made and they will learn and it's all good. The first time one of their caches goes missing they'll either quit or get better.

 

The difference between learning to hide and learning to find is that hiding is obviously so much more public. How many of us remember thinking "ah, only 300 yards to go, thats close enogh to leave the trail and head for the cache." Only to learn Rule #1. Never leave the trail until you have to, it's just not worth it. At least that is a rule on the north coast, (and in Arizona odly enough. Where there are no bushes and it just doesn't look like bush wacking until it is too late.) Or what about the cache you stood ontop of for half an hour before giving up only to find it right there another time. Which is Rule #2 When approaching area use the force and observe. (Or some such zen as works for you) Or DNF a cache that you spent two hours on but didnt have the cache page with you, only to get home to learn that it was a multi. I think Rule #3 needs no introduction (maybe it should be Rule #1)

 

Good thing those incidents weren't so public as hiding a cache or some of us would have died of embarassment.

 

I think it is up to the individual to decide to hunt a newbies cache. Could be great, could suck, coords could be way off, could be a DNF cause your front tire is parked on the cache. People hide cache because they want to give to the game. The least we can do is give back to them and also to the game by giving them feedback in our logs.

 

Have I really been talking that long?

Well said.

 

El Diablo

Link to comment
Yes, I guess some of the other tips you have there could help, but most of it is common sense.

"Common Sense" - what is it? How do you aquire it?

 

It's "stuff everybody knows or can figure out" or is it? You're not born with it. Much of what is taught children is 'common sense' - "Don't touch the stove, it's hot" but to someone who hasn't experienced heat that doesn't really explain (yes, a personal experience). So someone who has never hidden a box before may not ask all the right questions/know all the answers.

 

How do you avoid mistakes? - Common Sense.

How do you get common sense? - Experience.

How do you get experience? - Make Mistakes.

 

If everyone had to learn everything from scratch, we'd still be in the stone age. We need to share what we've learned with others so they don't repeat our mistakes - after all, there are so many new ones to be discovered! :lol:

Link to comment

If a minimum number of finds were required before a cacher were allowed to place one, what would it be? 10? 20? 50? More? And who is to say that any number is a good one?

 

I know a player that does mostly virtual and reverse caches. Therefore, there is no knowledge of hopw to hide a phisical cache to draw on. This player has over 30 finds. And NO, I'm not gonna tell you who it is.

 

The guidelines for setting a cache are just that. Guidelines. Yes, there are a few hard and fast rules for placing. Other than the 528-foot rule, I don't agree with many of them, but it's not my game. The point is, we don't need minimum requirements, or some other set of rules for players to hide a cache. You either learn as you go, or you don't. If you don't, people won't come hunting yours, and that's the ultimate statement on your abilities.

Link to comment
I know what you mean. this person is local to me and they have NO finds and 8 hides! WTF is up with THAT? I don't know why any of them got approved with zero finds.

If you look at the number of finds I have it will show 2. Is that all the finds I have? Not hardly. I started geocaching before it was a household word with a Magellan 315.

 

Then due to my caches being stolen, the lack of caches in my area (which today is no longer a problem), my switching jobs, moving to a new city, having a first child with serious birth defects and blah, blah, blah I took a 3 year hiatus from geocaching.com.

 

When I tried to log on I couldn't recall my password/username or what email address I might have used (probably no longer active). Thus, I signed on with a new account.

 

I have 2 finds, but have already ordered 8 TB tags which I will place shortly after their arriving.

 

I am already thinking about places in my new area to start hiding caches.

 

I could very well end up having 8 caches/TBs and 2 finds.

 

The moral is don't judge a book by it's cover.

Link to comment

 

The moral is don't judge a book by it's cover.

I, in fact, did not judge the book by its cover. I had tried all three of the caches I was venting about. That is also why I did not use the "R" word. The first one is probably my fault for not being able to see what is right in front of my face. The second one that I mentioned would have been a total bushwhack for 100 yards with a fair sized stream someplace in the middle. The third is just plain lame. The Jester did that one today and had the same trouble the rest of us did since he had not read the logs. I probably would not have mentioned this had this not been three caches that were all new within a few days and I tried them when they first came out. I think it was a bit of frustration coming out.

 

Getting back to the quote above, making a rule on number of finds would be prejudging the ability of the hider. I would not want to do that, but new hiders need to know more about what makes a good hide and how to get good coordinates. Placing a box 100 yards into the brush with no obvious entry point is not fun to go looking for. Placing one two feet from the trail out in the open is not fun either. Make me stretch a bit, but make it reasonable.

 

I think it is a problem with no solution, but something new people should be aware of.

 

Thanks for listening to my venting.

Link to comment
The third is just plain lame. The Jester did that one today and had the same trouble the rest of us did since he had not read the logs.

I even knew it was the subject of this thread! I just got in a hurry and forgot to check everything before heading out. I think the last couple of hiders worked at hiding the cache better. I know I added a little more cover. The worst part of it is that about 15-20 feet away is a nice little hollow stump that would have made a great hiding spot (I was tempted to move it there, but resisted).

 

I think it is a problem with no solution, but something new people should be aware of.

 

Maybe not "no solution", but no easy solution. You can't MAKE people read the info available, much less interpret it the same (see the threads on the rating system for example). Even making them aware info is available isn't always easy. We can just keep doing the best we can, helping those who need it (whether they like it or not! :lol: ), and occasionally vent our frustrations with a rant in the forums.

Link to comment

I´ve checked the logs to some of the caches of the people you talk about.

The logging people had fun - so what is your problem?

 

BTW - most of the people refered to as "look at this guy who..." are TEAMS.

Teams consist of at least two members, who perhaps log their finds on their personal account and hide caches together in a seperate account.

 

Last Eastern i have been to Italy. Someone who had 500+ finds from USA (!) has hidden a cache where 8 MILLION people walk by EACH YEAR - I mean - HOW DUMB IS THAT?

 

And in the end, do YOU want to kill others people enthusiasm? THAT WOULD BE EXTREMELY LAME! Then you havn´t understood anything about GC - Then i´d consider YOU the n00b and not the GC-beginner.

 

I think that placing caches is no matter of finds - there are good and not so good hiding places. Then go there find it - And submit a log with an advice to improve that cache...

 

$hogun

Link to comment
Common Sense" - what is it? How do you aquire it?

 

It's "stuff everybody knows or can figure out" or is it? You're not born with it. Much of what is taught children is 'common sense' - "Don't touch the stove, it's hot" but to someone who hasn't experienced heat that doesn't really explain (yes, a personal experience). So someone who has never hidden a box before may not ask all the right questions/know all the answers.

 

How do you avoid mistakes? - Common Sense.

How do you get common sense? - Experience.

How do you get experience? - Make Mistakes.

 

You're mistaking common sense for education.

Link to comment
has hidden a cache where 8 MILLION people walk by EACH YEAR - I mean - HOW DUMB IS THAT?

Hopefully I'm just missing some of my own brand of sarcasm here, because I fail to see how hiding a cache where "8 million people walk by it every year" is "dumb"? This cache has 10's of thousands of people walk within feet of it every day, and has been there for over 2 years. Still one of my favorite urban/stealth type finds.

Link to comment

I know a local cacher who has a few hundred finds and 40 or so hides... and their coordinates are always bad. So experience doesn't always help

 

On the otherhand a new cacher in my area with one find (at the time) hid a cache that I consider one of the best I have ever found. If you are ever in Southern Oregon for a while I definatley recommend this cache.

Link to comment
You're mistaking common sense for education.

Yes, common sense comes from 'education' (not formal education - schooling). If it didn't every person in the world would have it the same as everyone else.

 

common sense  1 : sound and prudent judgement  2 : the unreflective opinions of ordinary men

Merriam-Webster Dictionary

 

Both judgement and opinion is based on knowledge and experience.

Link to comment

 

Getting back to the quote above, making a rule on number of finds would be prejudging the ability of the hider.  I would not want to do that, but new hiders need to know more about what makes a good hide and how to get good coordinates.  Placing a box 100 yards into the brush with no obvious entry point is not fun to go looking for.  Placing one two feet from the trail out in the open is not fun either.  Make me stretch a bit, but make it reasonable.

 

 

It appears as though the hider is only guilty of rating the cache wrongly. I don't know which caches are being critiqued, but a cache hidden deep in brush sounds like it needs about 3 1/2 or 4 stars for D/T. Try suggesting to the owner the correct way to rate his caches.

 

Sorry the caches didn't meet your expectations, but that's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes. I'm sure there are some who will enjoy these caches just the way they are.

 

John

Link to comment
I know what you mean. this person is local to me and they have NO finds and 8 hides! WTF is up with THAT? I don't know why any of them got approved with zero finds.

If you look at the number of finds I have it will show 2. Is that all the finds I have? Not hardly. I started geocaching before it was a household word with a Magellan 315.

 

Then due to my caches being stolen, the lack of caches in my area (which today is no longer a problem), my switching jobs, moving to a new city, having a first child with serious birth defects and blah, blah, blah I took a 3 year hiatus from geocaching.com.

 

When I tried to log on I couldn't recall my password/username or what email address I might have used (probably no longer active). Thus, I signed on with a new account.

 

I have 2 finds, but have already ordered 8 TB tags which I will place shortly after their arriving.

 

I am already thinking about places in my new area to start hiding caches.

 

I could very well end up having 8 caches/TBs and 2 finds.

 

The moral is don't judge a book by it's cover.

READ a little closer (click on the link) before you assume Mopar is judging anyone. Click the link he has provided, read the page, and then tell me if you really think he is judging anyone, or just poking fun at himself and his better half.

Link to comment
has hidden a cache where 8 MILLION people walk by EACH YEAR - I mean - HOW DUMB IS THAT?

Hopefully I'm just missing some of my own brand of sarcasm here, because I fail to see how hiding a cache where "8 million people walk by it every year" is "dumb"? This cache has 10's of thousands of people walk within feet of it every day, and has been there for over 2 years. Still one of my favorite urban/stealth type finds.

I guess you are right.

 

I forgot to write, that everyone who walked by must have seen it and thought it is rubbish. And one day the town cleaning people cleaned the holes, where it was in.

 

The (very hard saying) "dumb" thing is, that this cache can get lost and the owner is on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean and can´t do anything to renew it.

 

I hope i made my point clear now.

 

$hogun

Link to comment
I dont think that making a limit is a good idea

 

Geocaching is a GREAT game/sport and it will stay that way as long as the players and administrators try to uphold the integrity of the game. New players coming into the game need to think a little more when hiding a cache. Lately I have found caches that looks as if the hider just threw the container out the window of their car. So far I have found this to be one cacher in particular and what will happen is hardcore cachers like myself will stop looking for caches put out by this fellow. I already do not look for one guys caches because his cache placements were in bad taste and it looks like I will be adding another to my don't bother list.

 

When hiding a cache I try to bring the treasure hunter to a place of interest, throw in a little history and make the hunt entertaining and than have a treasure at the end of the trail not a box of rocks, which I have found. By doing that I give back to the game and give it and my caches integrity. People want to hunt for my caches. There are certain cachers that I watch and wait for them to hide something because they too put integrity back into this game, right off hand I can tell you any cache hidden by the HairyHillBilly is a must find. He will take you to parts of this country that will absolutely take your breath away and that is not because it is a long hard hike but because it is a place of interest, of history and enjoyment .

 

GC SHOULD stand by their guidelines and not let a new cacher put out a cache until 50 finds are reached. That may eliminate the bad, not worth the effort caches but than again maybe it wouldn't. The limit is for the new cacher to increase in experience, if a newcomer finds say 14 caches rated 1/1, there is no experience in the hunt or game for that cacher. If GC wants to hold up the integrity of this game/sport than the integrity of the guidelines need to be upheld, period.

 

I love this game. I want the Ozarks to be a place where fellow geocachers from all over the states will come and hunt our hidden treasures and leave remembering WOW!! that was a great time!! A cache on the side of the road isn't much of a good time . Let's try to keep the integrity in this game we ALL seem to enjoy.

 

Jeepers

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...