Anton Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 When will the moratorium on locationless caches be over? When will the new "functionality" be ready? How long has it been since the moratorium began, 2 years? ---- Copied from the Geocaching.com FAQ list: "Locationless Caches - There is currently a moratorium on locationless caches. No caches will be posted until functionality is available to better serve this unique category."
+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 Yeah I think they're toast. I had a couple of ideas for placing them but it appears I was too slow on the draw.
+Renegade Knight Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 It's been a long time. The only site that lists them right now is gpsgames site run by Scout.
+mtn-man Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 In talking to Jeremy about it he has said that he will not give any specific dates. They will be back eventually.
+GeoCyclist Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 Bring em back! Bring em back! I have an idea for a locationless cache but I can't find where I put it. (Okay I know this is bad but I couldn't resist)
+garri Posted July 11, 2004 Posted July 11, 2004 What about lame locationless caches? They will be back too?
+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 What about lame locationless caches? They will be back too? Probably not but they'll be pleny of lame whiners to go around.
+Will+Bill Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 Also when will TB & Benchmark images be in Galleries?
+The Navigatorz Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 I think Locationless caches are subtly being eliminated by gc.com as a geocache. If you look at the different types caches here Cache Types, a Locationless Cache is still a type of cache. But if you do a search for geocaches by username here: Geocaching - Hide and Seek, put in any Username and you will get a listing titled: "All Geocaches by Username (Found)". But......this list does NOT include Locationless Caches. Prior to about 2 months ago, this search list DID include Locationless Caches. Now it doesn't. Why? Good question. I asked why in another thread once and didn't get a good answer. On the other hand, if you look at someone's profile page and click the User Stats tab, there you will find "Total Caches Found" does include Locationless Caches. It seems to me gc.com isn't really interested in continuing with Locationless caches, at least they are Very Low Priority to them. They should either come right out and say, we made a mistake. Locationless caches are not true caches and we're eliminating them from our sight. Or....lift the moratorium, and make the cache totals consistent.
+9Key Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 It seems to me gc.com isn't really interested in continuing with Locationless caches, at least they are Very Low Priority to them. I think you hit the nail on the head. Don't hold your breath waiting for them to come back.
+Mopar Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 I think Locationless caches are subtly being eliminated by gc.com as a geocache. If you look at the different types caches here Cache Types, a Locationless Cache is still a type of cache. But if you do a search for geocaches by username here: Geocaching - Hide and Seek, put in any Username and you will get a listing titled: "All Geocaches by Username (Found)". But......this list does NOT include Locationless Caches. Prior to about 2 months ago, this search list DID include Locationless Caches. Now it doesn't. Why? Good question. I asked why in another thread once and didn't get a good answer. On the other hand, if you look at someone's profile page and click the User Stats tab, there you will find "Total Caches Found" does include Locationless Caches. It seems to me gc.com isn't really interested in continuing with Locationless caches, at least they are Very Low Priority to them. They should either come right out and say, we made a mistake. Locationless caches are not true caches and we're eliminating them from our sight. Or....lift the moratorium, and make the cache totals consistent. There was a very GOOD answer to your question. The hide/seek search is a location-based search. Locationless caches of course don't have a fixed location. One of the many things that needs to be fixed for LCs is right now all caches here NEED a location, so one has to be assigned to LCs. Often it is the location of an example of what the hider was looking for. Of course, that example can no longer be logged by anyone else, so for anyone who lives near one, or is searching for caches in that area, it would show up as an unfound cache that cant be found there. VERY annoying to most people.
Keystone Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 They should either come right out and say, we made a mistake. Locationless caches are not true caches and we're eliminating them from our sight. Or....lift the moratorium, and make the cache totals consistent. I wouldn't expect the site to make either of these statements, since neither of them square with the actual plans.
+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 I wouldn't expect the site to make either of these statements, since neither of them square with the actual plans. wait a sec, there are actual plans??????
+The Navigatorz Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 (edited) Why don't they put all locationless cache coordinates as the North Pole, so that way the other coordinates on earth wouldn't be taken by the locationless caches. Just do a search for N90.000 and W000.000 and get a listing of all locationless caches. Oh but dang, what if someone wants to hide a locationless at the North Pole? I see the predicament. Seriously though, Mopar, I didn't see that answer, but that makes sense. I must have missed that explanation in the forums. It's just if your not aware of that logic, then it appears that the totals as explained above are inconsistant. Perhaps a clarification: All geocaches "except" locationless, since a locationless is still defined as a Geocache on the Cache Types page? Edited coordinate. Edited July 12, 2004 by The Navigatorz
+planetrobert Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 Why don't they put all locationless cache coordinates as the North Pole, so that way the other coordinates on earth wouldn't be taken by the locationless caches. Just do a search for N00.000 and W000.000 and get a listing of all locationless caches. Oh but dang, what if someone wants to hide a locationless at the North Pole? I see the predicament. Seriously though, Mopar, I didn't see that answer, but that makes sense. I must have missed that explanation in the forums. It's just if your not aware of that logic, then it appears that the totals as explained above are inconsistant. Perhaps a clarification: All geocaches "except" locationless, since a locationless is still defined as a Geocache on the Cache Types page? actualy N 90.0000 W 000.000000 would be the north pole.
+Renegade Knight Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 Locationless caches need to be assignable to regions. As the hobby grows so would the world wide logging of locatinolees. It was Yellow Jeep Fever with 1000+ logs that was archived due to site issues with that many logs. Other locatinoless would follow. Germany specific locationless would need to be possible. Cache owners would need to be able to specify "Germany only" or the region of interest. If the item is rare enough worldwide would work. Assigning a Locationless to the north pole isn't really a good solution to the problem of what region a cache owner intends his locationless cache go be good for. That's one issue with locationless that needs solved before they can come back in their own location like benchmarks.
+BlueDeuce Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 What about lame locationless caches? They will be back too? Just as long as people remember that the "Car on a Pole" was a lame locationless I have decided not to submit, ever. But I do claim dibs on the idea.
+sbell111 Posted July 12, 2004 Posted July 12, 2004 Darn, just when I was going to log that 65 Mustang on the pole I found.
+briansnat Posted July 13, 2004 Posted July 13, 2004 (edited) I'm not a big fan of locationless caches. I have a few sprinkled among my finds, but I don't go out of my way to find them. But a lot of people do like them, particularly those in cache poor areas. I think what confuses a lot of people is the following statement from this website's FAQs': Are there any variations in the game? YES! We strongly encourage it, actually. Geocaching is a game that constantly reinvents itself, and the rules are very flexible. If you have a new idea on how to place a cache, or a new game using GPS units, we'd love to hear about it. It is obviously no longer valid and probably should be removed. Edited July 13, 2004 by briansnat
MOCKBA Posted July 13, 2004 Posted July 13, 2004 I think what confuses a lot of people is the following statement from this website's FAQs': Are there any variations in the game? YES! We strongly encourage it, actually. Geocaching is a game that constantly reinvents itself, and the rules are very flexible. If you have a new idea on how to place a cache, or a new game using GPS units, we'd love to hear about it. What confusion? No confusion here. The site would like to know just how the cachers are planning to misuse the site and to loophole around the rules, so as to adjust the rules to preclude the future creative deviations. Constant reinvention of itself, indeed
+briansnat Posted July 13, 2004 Posted July 13, 2004 I think what confuses a lot of people is the following statement from this website's FAQs': Are there any variations in the game? YES! We strongly encourage it, actually. Geocaching is a game that constantly reinvents itself, and the rules are very flexible. If you have a new idea on how to place a cache, or a new game using GPS units, we'd love to hear about it. What confusion? No confusion here. The site would like to know just how the cachers are planning to misuse the site and to loophole around the rules, so as to adjust the rules to preclude the future creative deviations. Constant reinvention of itself, indeed I would hardly call locationless caches "misuse of the site". If it was felt that way in the beginning, they would have put a stop to it after the first one. And Jeremy would't be promising to bring them back, some day. He would have said "no more" period.
Anton Posted July 18, 2004 Author Posted July 18, 2004 See the list of all my LCs below. You really think LCs aren't as much of a challenge, or just as much fun to play, as finding another silly ammobox in the woods? If so, you must be some kind of box-junkie. It's time to think OUT of the box, and to let this game grow and evolve. Some LCs may be silly, like that infamous Yellow Jeep cache that never should have been allowed. I like to think that my LCs have some educational value. The only exception is the Diners Club cahce, which was just for fun. On the other hand, it can no longer be said that geocachers out on a hunt can't find a good place to eat. If you read the logs, you'll find good diners all over the planet. Not a bad thing to know. Here's the list, from most recent going back to my first attempt at an LC. Enjoy! Anton ----- 14 Locationless Geocaches by Anton Historic Arsenal http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=47732 Amphitheater - Classically Greek! http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=46812 Know Your Important Birds http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=43009 Plethoric Planetaria http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=40649 Morphologically Meromictic http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=37099 Women of Courage http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=36018 Arboretum Walkabout http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=35307 Presidents on Parade http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=33852 Chess for Kings http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=28365 Ride the Underground Railroad http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=27393 Observatory Quest http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=27254 Native American History Lesson http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=26263 Historic Forts http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=21378 Diners Club http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=21289
+Mopar Posted July 19, 2004 Posted July 19, 2004 Some LCs may be silly, like that infamous Yellow Jeep cache that never should have been allowed. Just a little FYI: If I remember my geocaching history 101 class right, that silly yellow jeep locationless that should have never been allowed was pretty much the very first Locationless cache. If that silly cache had never been allowed there might never have even been such a thing as LCs.
+flask Posted July 21, 2004 Posted July 21, 2004 Some LCs may be silly, like that infamous Yellow Jeep cache that never should have been allowed. Just a little FYI: If I remember my geocaching history 101 class right, that silly yellow jeep locationless that should have never been allowed was pretty much the very first Locationless cache. If that silly cache had never been allowed there might never have even been such a thing as LCs. ...AND there probably wouldn't be all those cute little yellow jeep TB's either.
Recommended Posts