Jump to content

Limit On New Caches


Followers 6

Recommended Posts

BrianSnat, no I was saying they could list one a month. Not only have a day or two to hide them.

 

As far as the whining, can we please stop whining about those that are whining? And while we are at it, lets please stop whining about those that are whining about others who are whining....oops. ;)

 

As those have stated that certain problems are not necessarily widespread, well neither are other problems. For example, virts, 528 ft rule and etc., but they are there and in place. They help where there are problems, as this is why they are in place and it deters from the problem happening elsewhere. Different problems that come up in different areas have to be looked at seriously and dealt with. Just because it happens here doesn't mean it will happen there, and especially the opposite of that statement. Of course we would all love no more "rules' . Actually there are no rules, right? But the thing is, is that you can not get this many people together to do one common thing without setting things to keep it on track. The sport is not perfect and as it grows more and more, so does the aspect of it and it's guidelines. "Crappy caches" are nothing new. They have been around everywhere. Someone else mentioned about a person finding a certain number of caches first to get the experience and then place caches of there own. That's a great idea. That at would least cut down some it probably. i would have no problem with someone having 84 caches that were thought out ones and maintained. But then it all crosslinks into the properly maintaining issue and that crosslinks into other issues. I believe there has been quick reactions to certain problems that it was easier to say you can't do that, rather than thinking out how it affects other things realistically and in a common sense manner.

Link to comment
BrianSnat, no I was saying they could list one a month. Not only have a day or two to hide them

 

So if have 6 full ammo boxes and six locations scouted and one day set aside to hide them, I have to wait a month between posting each listing?

 

I really don't see what purpose that serves.

Link to comment
So if have 6 full ammo boxes and six locations scouted and one day set aside to hide them, I have to wait a month between posting each listing?

 

I really don't see what purpose that serves.

Exactly. I am constantly scouting out cool locations. But I only order ammo cans once every few months when I've found enough cool spots. So as soon as they come in, I fill them up with swag and go out and place all of them on the same day or weekend.

 

Why should I have to make half a dozen separate trips? That makes no sense to me.

Link to comment
So if have 6 full ammo boxes and six locations scouted and one day set aside to hide them,  I have to wait a month between posting each listing? 

 

I really don't see what purpose that serves.

Exactly. I am constantly scouting out cool locations. But I only order ammo cans once every few months when I've found enough cool spots. So as soon as they come in, I fill them up with swag and go out and place all of them on the same day or weekend.

 

Why should I have to make half a dozen separate trips? That makes no sense to me.

All that does is give other cachers the opportunity to obliterate your pre-scouted location for your well thought out caches with a crappy stop-n-dump cache. BS could have a year's worth of very well planned, excellent caches that he's worked for months on to make them special and to find special places to hide them, and another cacher could stop at WalMart, grab a tin of altoids, eat them on the way out to the woods, stuff a piece of paper in the tin, and poof!.....all of Briansnat's planning for that spot is shot down by another lame micro stop-n-dump. Nope....doesn't serve any positive purpose at all. And if the same cacher's scheduled dump day is one day ahead of Briansnat's, he could eradicate any chance of Briansnat's caches ever seeing the light of day, and obliterate an entire zip code with lame caches in a few month's time, and nobody would get the thrill of finding a well-planned cache by Briansnat.

Link to comment
As those have stated that certain problems are not necessarily widespread, well neither are other problems. For example, virts, 528 ft rule and etc., but they are there and in place. They help where there are problems, as this is why they are in place and it deters from the problem happening elsewhere.

That's a good point however, from what I can see, the 528 rule and the virtual guidelines don't adversely effect other areas. Whereas a cache limit, whether it's only one per month, x number of hides per cacher or whatever, would absolutely have an adverse effect on a great number of regions. On Long Island we have a very prolific hider by the name of Bayonets4u. Stopping him from hiding more great caches might open up the area for another cachers to hide chuck-it-out-the-window caches. You can't make a rule that helps a small minority of areas while it has a terribly negative effect on the great majority. If I have 10 great spots and 10 ammo cans filled with $30 worth of swag each, I should be able to hide them all in the same week if I wanted to. If the side effect of that is that for every 20 cachers that hide well thought out and above average caches, there's one that hides a bunch of "lame" caches, then so be it.

Edited by JMBella
Link to comment
All that does is give other cachers the opportunity to obliterate your pre-scouted location for your well thought out caches with a crappy stop-n-dump cache. BS could have a year's worth of very well planned, excellent caches that he's worked for months on to make them special and to find special places to hide them, and another cacher could stop at WalMart, grab a tin of altoids, eat them on the way out to the woods, stuff a piece of paper in the tin, and poof!.....all of Briansnat's planning for that spot is shot down by another lame micro stop-n-dump. Nope....doesn't serve any positive purpose at all. And if the same cacher's scheduled dump day is one day ahead of Briansnat's, he could eradicate any chance of Briansnat's caches ever seeing the light of day, and obliterate an entire zip code with lame caches in a few month's time, and nobody would get the thrill of finding a well-planned cache by Briansnat.

So what you're saying is that as soon as I see a good spot, I should place a stop-n-dump cache right away so that someone else can't? Hmm. ;)

Link to comment

I like to hide caches in bunches. While my total hides average out to approximately one per month, in reality it's been a handful of hiding sprees. I haven't hidden a cache since November. I like to hide all the caches I've been planning, all at once, as sort of a break when I am burned out from finding caches.

 

Let's be specific. Here are my four best hides of the "long hike in the park" variety:

 

Elves in the Vortex

The Elves Ride an Appaloosa

The Elves Tree a Raccoon

Eeny Meenie Miney Elves

 

If you're curious, read the logs. These are challenging caches that get good reviews. They are tough hikes up and down steep hills, with beautiful scenery. Although several have tried, it's thus far been impossible for anyone to find all four of them in one day.

 

What do these caches have in common? They were all placed on the same day, in the same park, after weeks of working with the park staff to get permission, select locations, scout out specifics, prepare containers, and hide the caches. I wanted them all to be ready in time for this temendously successful CITO Event held at the same park. The park had ZERO caches in it before I started working with them.

 

Under a "one cache per month" limit, I wouldn't have been able to do this, and I doubt that I would have had the patience or foresight to plan these hides over four months. It's not my style. So, if such a rule existed, there would probably be only one cache in this park. Which three of the above caches should I have eliminated?

 

Don't cramp my style. If I hide a lame cache, let me know. I'll archive it voluntarily.

Link to comment

Before anyone tries to pigion hole or stereotype me, I like all kinds of caches. On a given day I may spend 4 hours to find a 4/4 or if the mood strikes me I'll spend a couple of hours driving to a more cache dense area and hunt for easy micro's all day. I'll ask this again since I've never gotten a satisfactory answer to it. Do that many people go into an area blind without cache pages to tell them what to expect? If I go into an urban area to go caching should I expect a scenic view or a wow factor to knock my socks off? Are my expectations too low? A lot of people actually like finding those easy lampost and gaurdrail caches. Nobody is forcing them to do it. If you drive into the center of town should you really expect a long hike or a great view, if so maybe your personal expectations are a little too high. ;)

 

Am I wrong in assuming that this is what we are talking about here? Maybe I'm just lucky that in my area on any given day you have a choice in which you could do either style of caches. B)

Link to comment
I'll ask this again since I've never gotten a satisfactory answer to it. Do that many people go into an area blind without cache pages to tell them what to expect? If I go into an urban area to go caching should I expect a scenic view or a wow factor to knock my socks off? Are my expectations too low? A lot of people actually like finding those easy lampost and gaurdrail caches. Nobody is forcing them to do it. If you drive into the center of town should you really expect a long hike or a great view, if so maybe your personal expectations are a little too high. ;)

I'll speak for myself, but based on other notes I've seen on threads like this, plus the many notes of support I've received privately, I suspect I'm not alone:

 

Of course when I target a metro area for a day (or more) of caching, I expect lots of micros and/or other types of "not much hiking if at all" kinds of caches. Like you, I LIKE a cross-section of caches, and I find the occasional "lame" micro a diversion and a quick stat. I DON'T NEED to do a 2-mile hike for every cache (and frankly, I'm in no shape for it more than occasionally).

 

There's a difference, however, between a GOOD quickie micro (worthwhile location - nice view, historical landmark, etc) and a "lame" one (any ol' parking lot/dumpster/base of bush/side of road/etc). And there's a further difference between ONE or TWO "lame" ones, and having an area BLANKETED with them.

 

I believe my expectations are realistic. How come I can go to Orlando, Tallahassee, Winston-Salem, DFW, Mpls/St Paul, and my own Miss. Gulf Coast, and find this good cross-section, and I can go to other metro areas (which I've named elsewhere but I'll decline this time) and drive from cache to cache (lamppost to bush to dumpster to lamppost again) getting more frustrated every time?

 

Local cachers in those latter areas argue that there's "something for everyone" there, and that may be true, but I and apparently quite a few other people around here believe that this PROLIFERATION is taking our game in the wrong direction.

 

-Dave R.

Link to comment
...but I and apparently quite a few other people around here believe that this PROLIFERATION is taking our game in the wrong direction.

 

-Dave R.

Only if you follow.

 

It's like the guy who goes to the Dr. and says. "Dr. I hurts when I do this" so the Dr. says "Then don't do that."

RK, you just made my point (as well as with Log #10 of your excellent post on the other current thread).

 

Folks in some areas have elected to hide not one or two of that certain style of hide/cache, but 10, 20, 50, or more of them, and NEW cachers see that as the example to follow. So, the sore festers. That's what I (and others posting in support of this point of view) are trying to say (and hopefully prevent from becoming further excessive).

 

Yes, RK, every cache has something to offer everyone. Still, is that style of hide what we went to see DOMINATE our game? The trend is pretty tough to ignore, you think?

 

-Dave R.

Link to comment

I stated the one a month as an example. The idea behind the limit, whether it be monthly, yearly or whatever would work for several reasons. Just like on message boards when people post real quickly, they may run into a "flood control". That keeps people from flooding the forums. The same could work for listing caches. There are people, not all those that place caches or those who place a number of caches, but those that do place a number of them without any concern for fellow cachers. Doesn't really matter if they place 1 or 100, if they don't care, they just don't care. But I do think there needs to be something in place to at least educate newer folks on what a cache should be. Whether it's a limit or not allowed to place a cache without finding a certain amount or something else. Another issue is those that saturate areas with caches and others have no where to place them. Of course there may be other areas, but then you get inot the discussions of legal places to place them and then you have to worry about if it becomes too far away and becomes a vacation cache....lol Another thought would be perhaps that just like the 528 ft rule, that there be another distance further apart that a cache owner can not place a cache that close to a previous one of theirs. Lets say .5 mile. That way at least 3 or 4 other people can place a cache in between there somewhere. Just an idea. As I stated earlier, these are ideas to problems that some may experience or that some may see as becoming a problem. Imagine a poor soul in Nashville TN, that tries to place a cache somewhere down town. Unless caches get archived, there will be a waiting list on the spots to put one there for a long long time...lol

Link to comment

Generally, badly placed, poorly thought out caches tend to go missing sooner so it all evens out.

 

I have finished a number of BrianSnat's caches and would say everyone of them has been superb (other than the lame roadside one, which has its own story).

 

I have cached in 4 countries and 5 states in a variety of settings and his caches still rank above 95% of the junk out there.

 

I am not keen on micros in parking lots - it is technically it is private property so they shouldn't get approved there. (just like you can't get a ticket in a parking lot because it is private property :lol: )

 

:unsure:

 

But who would stop people from opening multiple accounts if they restricted cache placement?

Link to comment

Pipanella, are you anywhere near Allen, Auglaze or Hardin counties? Sure sounds like it, everytime I have to head up that way (which is far too often) I look to see if there are any new caches (a rare occurrence). I am thinking that I will have to place one or two myself next time I am up there (in a week or so).

 

Come on down to Cinci we have plenty of caches to go around ;)

 

On the subject of poorly placed caches down here in SW Ohio we had a certain cacher who placed hundreds of caches in a very short time. Many of them were micros hidden in parking lots under light pole covers and the like. It got to the point where I did not hunt any of his hides. Some of them were great but most were at best so-so but I still do not think that more rules would be the answer.

 

Another cacher we had placed around 100 caches and most of them were pretty good. Some of them were very innovative. There was a bit of time before any needed maintenance was done on any cache of his. So yes, I would have to agree that more than a handful of caches can lead to maintenance problems expecially if you have a job and family that also need your time.

 

I do not think there is a simple answer just because there are so many different personalities, styles and reasons for placing a cache. Yeah, I often ask myself why I am looking for a micro in a narrow strip of trees and grass between an office building and a car rental. Many times I pass on these but when it is 1.6 miles from your front door well . . . .

 

Yes I was burned by a prolific placer who beat me to the punch by placing, actually a quite good cache about 450 feet from the spot I was scouting. Oh well, he eventually self destructed at gc.com (ended up being banned) and many of his caches were archived several of the more memorable ones, and a few of the less scenic . . ., were adopted by local cachers. I adopted the one that he burned me on and eventually it vanished so now I am free to use my original idea and location.

 

It is up to the community to police ourselves. One of the groups down here started a series of caches:

Waypoint for #1 GCH57K

Captain's Logs are our Club caches that our members place. The idea behind these caches is to show the New Cachers how to hide and find caches. Each member can only place one of these caches.

 

So far there are ten of these from 1 - 13 (4,5,6 are not listed). Unfortunately, these are ALL MICRO CACHES*

#7 is cracked and soaked (noted 6 June) No action taken,

#11 the coords are off by 300' (reported 25 February) No action taken,

#9 was last found on 15 may and there have been 6 DNFs since then, No action taken.

Good idea, poor follow through.

 

Place as many caches as you like but make d*** sure that you can and will maintain them all!

 

<sarcasm>

* I am guessing that once you know how to hide a micro cache in a narrow strip of Honeysuckle and poison ivy placing a traditional cache becomes second nature.

</sarcasm>

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 6
×
×
  • Create New...