Jump to content

Geocaching Highbrow


Snoogans

Recommended Posts

I have to agree with Snoogans. Caches are caches. More is better. There are caches within 5 miles of my house that I haven't bothered to hunt. I'm not a fan of puzzle caches, because I cache to get outside, not to sit at a computer and figure out a puzzle. I do crosswords when I want a puzzle. But anyone is free to put out any number of puzzle caches, and I have no objections at all. If parking lot micros were banned, then there wouldn't be many caches in cities. Caches everywhere, of every type, are good. Someone wants to do them, and anyone who doesn't like that type cache is perfectly free to search elsewhere. A glance at a map shows whether the cache is in the woods or in a parking lot, and if you want to cache in the woods, then don't go near parking lots. Geocaching isn't something that affects world peace; it's just a hobby for geeks. Get over it, and get on with your caching.

Link to comment
High•brow: Of, relating to, or being highly cultured or intellectual: as in- They only attend highbrow events such as the ballet or the opera.

n.

One who possesses or affects a high degree of culture or learning.

Who's this "paloy" person you're shouting ahoy to? :D

 

(Hoi polloi actually mean "the common people", not the elite or upper crust.)

See my similar post above in this thread. I believe there's been a confusion here between "hoi polloi" ("the common people") and "hoity toity" (couldn't find a definition but the commonly accepted one has to do with snobbery, the upper-crust, etc.).

 

The only place I recall hearing "Ahoy Paloy" was when Spalding said it to Danny in Caddyshack when Danny showed up at the Yacht Club wearing his ship's steward outfit.

 

-Dave R.

Well, actually I was naming opposites in geocaching: The Highbrow (who want their version of quality over quantity) and The Hoi Polloi. (who just want another choice of a cache to hunt.)

 

I used the movie quote misspelling, "Ahoy paloy," to see if anyone would say something about it. I assumed a member of the ARG Club would........ :huh:

 

Side bar about this thread and why I posted it:

 

I'm not saying that being Highbrow, or in the ARG, or GPC clubs is a bad thing. Heck NO! You guys put out the best caches and I'm lucky to live in an area with some truly awesome caches in much higher frequency than other parts of the country where I have cached. If you get my drift..... Shucks, some people find me a bit highbrow at times, (ask RK) but I've never been called PC or anal retentive.

 

What I'm trying to understand is why these same people (not all, but many) think that a cache that isn't up to their standards should be run down, banned, regulated, etc.

 

People are what they are and that's OK unless they try to impose their will on other people. (I.E. "Parking lot micros/virtuals etc. suck. You all should see it MY way and ban them, regulate them, and bad mouth them and the lousy hoi polloi that would place them. Lame caches are ruining geocaching! Can't you SEE?") There's a new thread along these lines every week. I find it all terribly entertaining that so many people refuse to accept responsibility for their own experiences. No one forced you to find a lame cache. You CHOSE to hunt it and you found a cache that failed to enhance your personal aesthetic of what geocaching is all about. The responsibility for this subjective lame cache experience is yours and not the person who hid it.

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment
I find it all terribly entertaining that so many people refuse to accept responsibility for their own experiences. No one forced you to find a lame cache. You CHOSE to hunt it and you found a cache that failed to enhance your personal aesthetic of what geocaching is all about. The responsibility for this subjective lame cache experience is yours and not the person who hid it.

That is one of the truest things ever to appear in this forum...

I don't understand the people who are so driven that they can't have a cache unfound in their area and still sleep at night.

 

It's for FUN people - remember FUN? It's that thing that makes ya :huh:

Link to comment
The Highbrow (who want their version of quality over quantity)...

I'm still a little confused.

 

Are you talking about people who advocate quality caches or are you talking about people who only want a particular type of cache?

 

Because it appears to me there are two different things being discussed here.

Link to comment

Nope. No specifics here CR. Just a generalization about the outward “Highbrow mindset.” You know, the “Listen to me, *I* know what’s good for geocaching mindset.”

 

I certainly am not trying to distance myself from that mindset completely. I do have highbrow tendencies, but they mostly remain unspoken when it comes to being outwardly judgmental towards another person's geocache contributions. I let my own contributions speak for themselves for better or worse.

Link to comment
Nope. No specifics here CR. Just a generalization about the outward “Highbrow mindset.” You know, the “Listen to me, *I* know what’s good for geocaching mindset.”

 

I certainly am not trying to distance myself from that mindset completely. I do have highbrow tendencies, but they mostly remain unspoken when it comes to being outwardly judgmental towards another person's geocache contributions. I let my own contributions speak for themselves for better or worse.

Okay, I can understand that.

 

However, if no one speaks up and says wet logs suck, leaky containers suck, trash in the container sucks, and a whole host of other things that makes for a crappy cache then how are people to really know? Sure you can place decent caches, yet the crappy cache still get the polite logs and the owner thinks it's okay.

 

Quite frankly the argument "look at a map" does nothing to address this. Many a time I go to a cache with the expectation that it will be worth my while. I show up find the cache and am left with an empty feeling, a feeling that this was a waste of time. There was no challenge in the hunt, no challenge in the trip, no challenge at all. On top of that it hasn't shown me anything but more nondescript woods or the back of a gas station. Big whoop-tee-doo. Then the trade items are lackluster used toys, the container leaks, and the log is wet. I fully expect something to be worth while. If I just wanted to get out of the house I could have put on an audio book and walked around the block and be infinitely more entertained.

 

No, I think there should be minimum standards, everyone should be aware of them and know they are fully expected to live up to them, these standards should be discussed, and gentle peer pressure should be brought to bare. It will only help the hobby to do so.

 

Even this site has a certain set of standards and force compliance. Not too close to railroad tracks, not on restricted lands, etc. are just a couple of examples. Of course, they are smart enough to have not gotten into asthetics (mostly), that's the community's job.

 

If you think wet moldy garbage filled caches is an acceptible standard then fine, but I don't know many who do.

Link to comment
However, if no one speaks up and says wet logs suck, leaky containers suck, trash in the container sucks, and a whole host of other things that makes for a crappy cache then how are people to really know?

 

If you think wet moldy garbage filled caches is an acceptable standard then fine, but I don't know many who do.

I don't think that is the focus of what was said at all. It is more a question of quality as regards the well placed, well camouflaged cache as opposed to the plastic box chucked under a thorn bush.

 

I don't believe that anyone sees virtue in a wet box full of moldy junk. I do, however, think that there are still some who place the previously mentioned plastic box/thorn bush caches and can't see the difference between their effort and that of another cacher who has spent hours, or even days, researching and preparing a placement.

Link to comment

There will always be wet logs. Cheap trade goods always end up dominating caches, because cachers leave cheap junk, no matter what was in the cache when it was put out. Some areas just aren't beautiful, and will never be, and the more people there are living, the more ugly places there will be. Just because the location isn't a wonderful place doesn't mean it shouldn't have a cache. Moaning about all this does no good, and is a waste of your time, my time, everyone else's time, and wastes electrons. Only go to beautiful wilderness areas to cache if that's what you want. Some people want to do a quick cache at lunch or on the way home from work, and can only do that in ugly places near urban areas. Cache and let cache is my motto.

Link to comment
There will always be wet logs. Cheap trade goods always end up dominating caches...

I'm sorry, but that is a defeatist attitude.

 

I recall having only one cache which had a wet log and that was because a finder signed it in the rain. I went right out and fixed it. And I'd rather someone not leave anything if they're going to otherwise leave junk.

 

The reason caches are or become junk is by choice. No one has to make that choice.

Link to comment
And the reason caches are considered lame is by choice. No one has to make that choice.

My posts weren't about "lame" which is more of a matter of taste. We're talking about meeting a standard by which most of us already agree, standards which I've touched on a couple of my posts earlier.

 

I take it the OP meant more like judging "lame" which is a moving target.

 

It may very well be that some folks can't seperate the issues any more than they can seperate "micro" and "lame/junk/crappy urban."

Link to comment
However, if no one speaks up and says wet logs suck, leaky containers suck, trash in the container sucks, and a whole host of other things that makes for a crappy cache then how are people to really know?

 

You have a point there, but it's not what you say about these issues so much as how many geocachers are going about saying it.

 

Sure you can place decent caches, yet the crappy cache still get the polite logs and the owner thinks it's okay.

 

Sooooo, are you saying harsher logs will improve a cache or maybe save someone else the trouble? IMO a jerk with good intentions is still a jerk. It's already pretty easy to tell a cache's intrinsic value by the length of the majority of it's logs. A dozen or more TFTC entries in a row should be a warning to those wishing to ONLY seek caches that enhance their aesthetic. The majority of cachers see that it's better to say nothing at all than to be negative.

 

Quite frankly the argument "look at a map" does nothing to address this.  Many a time I go to a cache with the expectation that it will be worth my while.  I show up find the cache and am left with an empty feeling, a feeling that this was a waste of time.  There was no challenge in the hunt, no challenge in the trip, no challenge at all.  On top of that it hasn't shown me anything but more nondescript woods or the back of a gas station.  Big whoop-tee-doo.  Then the trade items are lackluster used toys, the container leaks, and the log is wet. I fully expect something to be worth while.  If I just wanted to get out of the house I could have put on an audio book and walked around the block and be infinitely more entertained.

 

This is exactly my point. Ummmmmmmmm, quite frankly, the hider doesn't OWE you any of those things. :o The hider submitted a cache that an approver deemed to be within the guidelines for posting a cache on this site. That's it. End of responsibility for the hider other than maintenance. YOUR expectation of an experience left you feeling empty and that's nobody's fault but your own.

 

My usual spam quote in these instances:

 

"Everyone plays their own game. There is no sense in trying to police another's mindset as long as it falls within the general parameters of the game." Me (quoting myself from the poll that I posted on 10/23/03.)

 

The hider is playing a game called geocaching. They are evidently playing it right because their cache was approved.

 

You are also playing a GAME (sport/hobby/obsession/etc.) evidently called CR's version of Geocaching 1.5, or maybe even 2.O. You seem to be failing at your game if you are not able to enjoy it.

 

"Failure is a hard pill to swallow until you realize the only failure you can really have in this sport is the failure to enjoy yourself."

TotemLake 4/26/04

 

No, I think there should be minimum standards, everyone should be aware of them and know they are fully expected to live up to them, these standards should be discussed, and gentle peer pressure should be brought to bare. It will only help the hobby to do so.

 

:) Oh, paaaaalease. One person's gentle pressure is another's harassment. :o

 

Even this site has a certain set of standards and force compliance.  Not too close to railroad tracks, not on restricted lands, etc. are just a couple of examples.

 

Guidelines are enough. Where is the force? I don't see any.... There is no reason to fix what isn't broken.

 

Of course, they are smart enough to have not gotten into asthetics (mostly), that's the community's job.

 

I have some very colorful things to say offline about people who try to enforce their aesthetics in my area. What's good for one isn't always possible or even welcome for all. Again, the guidelines are enough. We can all do without the self appointed cache police. But hey, they do provide great entertainment. Gawd love 'em.

 

If you think wet moldy garbage filled caches is an acceptable standard then fine, but I don't know many who do.

 

Did I actually say that anywhere???? :)

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment
If you think wet moldy garbage filled caches is an acceptable standard then fine, but I don't know many who do.

 

Did I actually say that anywhere???? :o

Yes, but not in so many words. Your version of "acceptable" is it getting approved on gc.com. Period.

 

And the rest of the post makes it sound like just because someone put a scrap of paper in a broken *ware container and threw it in the local unofficial garbage dump that we ought to be grateful.

 

Sorry, I don't think so.

 

But you are right, it is a game. What is the goal of any game or hobby? To be entertained. To past the time in an enjoyable way. Why else would you do it? It's not as if it has to be done.

 

Placing a cache is like making a movie. The whole object is so someone else can enjoy it. If not, then why post it? Every single cache placed someone is saying "look at what I can do. I want you to find it." It's like an invitation. Same as making a movie. The whole purpose is to entertain. Don't think I should be grateful just because you made the biggest stinker of a movie of all time. Don't think I should be grateful just because you were able to get a cache approved on gc.com. It takes more than burning an image to celluloid to make a movie. It takes more than getting a cache approved on gc.com to make a decent cache.

 

If you're going to invite me out to be entertained, put some effort into it.

 

Otherwise, don't waste my time.

Link to comment
If you think wet moldy garbage filled caches is an acceptable standard then fine, but I don't know many who do.

 

Did I actually say that anywhere???? :)

Yes, but not in so many words. Your version of "acceptable" is it getting approved on gc.com. Period.

 

And the rest of the post makes it sound like just because someone put a scrap of paper in a broken *ware container and threw it in the local unofficial garbage dump that we ought to be grateful.

 

Sorry, I don't think so.

 

You'd be surprised how closely my version relates to yours. I too am playing Snoogans' version of Geocaching 2.0.

 

The only difference is that I don't EXPECT that everyone must upgrade to my version so *I* can continue to enjoy geocaching. Geocaching is not about me and I don't think that I can bend it to my will.......much :)

 

I.E.- Joe Schmo, five miles away, may only have time and effort to give in version 1.0. It's his version/aesthetic of the game and he IS playing it within the guidelines. It just so happens that I find his caches particularly lame in Snoogans version 2.0. I would be a total as$ to tell him that he is doing it the Snoogans version of wrong UNLESS he asked. (In which case my advice would prolly be self serving.) For now, I'll avoid his caches until he posts one that gets good reviews. Anyone who sticks with it usually upgrades to a higher standard and the problem starts all over again when they get a run of lame caches and DON'T REALIZE that they are now playing an upgraded version of the game.

 

The ONLY solution is NOT to judge but, to set the example. (The problem with me is that I'm not above placing a few lame ones just to annoy the complainers in my area. :o )

 

Placing a cache is like making a movie. The whole object is so someone else can enjoy it.  If not, then why post it?  Every single cache placed someone is saying "look at what I can do.  I want you to find it."  It's like an invitation.  Same as making a movie.  The whole purpose is to entertain.

 

I disagree. I have hidden a few to torture and torment. To make them crawl through muck and dirt and brambles only to find out that they could have planned an easier rout. The cool part is when people actually thank me for it. The only movies meant to do that have the word Scooby-Doo in them. :D

 

I want people to see one of my caches listed and KNOW it prolly ain't gonna be easy, but that's MY version of geocaching an no one else’s. That spells box office death for a director. Ask Warren Beatty. :o

 

In my version of Geocaching, I only expect to find a log book to sign and hope that the cache will enhance my geocaching experience. Too often it doesn't, but it doesn't make me angry like some people. A cache is not worth my anger in Snoogans' version of geocaching 2.0.

 

There are a few people who have told me to my face and by email that they won't hunt my caches in an attempt to bend me to their will. There are quite a few more who will burn rubber to be FTF on a Snoogans' cache. I also get great attendance when I post a CITO, because I give the coords to my puzzle caches away as an incentive to pick up trash.

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment
The whole purpose is to entertain.

 

I disagree. I have hidden a few to torture and torment. To make them crawl through muck and dirt and brambles only to find out that they could have planned an easier rout.

Don't sell yourself short--that is entertainment! The tough ones are entertaining. There are some where you might be cussing, fearing for your life, facing your phobias, or testing your physical limits, but later you have a tremendous sense of accomplishment.

 

There are some where you have to figure out just what the hell the hider wants you to do. You have to figure out how to proceed. You have to rack your brain to complete it.

 

No, these generally are at the other end of the spectrum of what I'm talking about. These are the equivilent of horror movies. If you like horror movies you like to be frightened. If you like Snoogan's caches, you like to be challenged.

 

Not saying there's never been a bad horror movie. I can tell you that I've yet to come across a cache that has challenged me that I could consider bad--even if it needed some maintenance.

 

One last note: let's not confuse "challenging" with "tedious." Though "tedious" challenges my patience, these are two completely different things. "Challenging" makes me want to proceed. "Tedious" makes me want to quit.

Link to comment

Pardon me for interjecting into the middle of your interesting debate, CR and Snoogans, but I spotted this in Snoogans' last response and couldn't help but post again:

 

The ONLY solution is NOT to judge but, to set the example.

 

The above statement has never been more pertinent. Presuming that the article about Geocaching indeed runs in this weekend's Parade magazine as was indicated elsewhere on these forums, and given that newspaper insert's wide circulation, our game is about to see one of its largest single influxes of new players ever.

 

Although I think every cacher should be asking him/herself this question ALL the time when hiding a cache, with this influx about to occur, everyone CERTAINLY needs to be asking him/herself NOW: "What example have *I* set with the caches I've hidden??"

 

Have I placed a cross-section of different kinds of caches and locations, so that our newcomers can experience a good sampling of the great variety our game has to offer, thus encouraging more players and more good hides/locations? Or, have I BOMBED my metro area with 101 or more lamppost / guardrail / parking lot / dumpster / any ol' roadside / any ol' bush / under-a-rock-in-a-field-of-rocks kinds of caches, thus giving newcomers who might choose these (or might not have a choice but to choose these because of where they happen to live!) the first impression that this is *all* the game is?

 

Now, in response to Snoogans' comments about different players choosing to play their own different versions of the game: OK, maybe those "BOMBER" hiders to which I refer above really do INTEND to set that as their example (as opposed to what I believe is really the case, which is that they're just simply "hidin' em like they like to find 'em", or that they're just throwing caches out there because they get a charge or some sort of personal validation out of receiving a few hundred "Found it" Emails).

 

If their intent is to set that type of hide/cache as the "example", I posit an opposing viewpoint: that a majority of cachers don't agree that this is the example we should be setting, and that the proper example is a cross-section of THOUGHTFULLY-CHOSEN cache types and locations (and those might even include the so-called "lame" ones here and there, as long as that's not the MAJORITY of what's out there). I might be wrong about that, but that is my opinion.

 

Remember, our newcomers will base their judgments of our game on their first few (or even their first ONE) cache hunt(s).

 

The upcoming Parade article puts our game, and us, on center stage. What example have YOU set?

-Dave R. in Biloxi

 

Dave's Note to Local Hiders

Dave's Opinions on Geocache Hiding

Edited by drat19
Link to comment
"Tedious" makes me want to quit.

That's exactly whyyyyy I posted this cache. My first truly lame micro. :o

 

If I got to a volcanic outcrop with thousands upon thousands of tiny holes to inspect, (like that cache) it would be over before it started. I'd simply walk away. Someone in the ARG Club living close by could become a little miffed by it. (I have the email to prove it.) Too bad. So sad. You wanna have the pretty red check mark? Ya gotta play MY game. But I also realize that at the same time you're playing yours. If cheating a tad bit is OK in your game I'm not gonna hold it against ya. Phone a friend is part of the game IMO.

Link to comment

I think you guys need to agree you disagree.

 

Each of you (read that as all of us) has an absolute level of "highbrow" that agrees with how you want the game to be played by both hider and seeker. Neither opinion will meet in the middle because of that absolute level.

 

I think Snoogan's point is there seems to be a small section of folks who think more rules and guidelines should be set to eliminate or limit the types of caches they think are lame or tedious because they think they know better than the rest of the players what a quality cache is.

 

Look at it this way... Checkers is an oversimplified version of Chess. Not entirely accurate, but there are similarities, and that is how Geocaching is played. Some people think checkers is pretty lame, whereas chess is mondo (and vice verse), and you will have that same opinion set in Geocaching.

 

The really cool part about this game is it doesn't really matter what level you're at or think of certain caches. There is somebody out there that really enjoys them.

Link to comment

I have bitten my tongue on a lot of these threads about poor quality caches. But, I really have a burning desire to ask this question.

 

Who the heck is making you hunt these caches that you don't like? (NB: This post/question is directed generally, not at a specific person.

 

I probably have a really different perspective on this, since in my neck of the woods there is an average of one cache per 21,000 sq. km. However, I think that makes me the luckiest cacher in the world. It will take me a couple of years of serious caching just to clear out the 15-20 closest unfound caches to me.

 

Whenever I travel to a cache-dense area, I pick a few caches that I think sound cool and I do them. I take the time to read through cache pages and read previous logs. Planning the trip is half the fun, especially if I have to use topo maps.

 

Read the cache page. If it doesn't sound interesting, don't do it. Who cares if you pass by 100 caches on the way to the one you want?

 

If the cache page is sparse or of low quality, that's probably a sign. If they didn't spend time and thought on the listing, they probably didn't spend time and thought on placing the cache either. So, give that one a miss.

 

My theory is it's like drugs. It's never as good as the first time, and the more you use them the less high you get, and you end up using more and more. Practice moderation (or move to the Yukon!) and I think you'll lose this frustration with the sport.

 

Regards,

Anthony

Edited by Gonzo-YT
Link to comment
Who the heck is making you hunt these caches that you don't like?

Well, in my case, I'm giving the hider the benefit of doubt. I'll hunt just about anything; devious puzzles, long hikes, urban micros, it doesn't matter. I do expect to get something out of it. (I just read Snoogan's tedious cache and I guess even that one would be entertaining in a way. Heck, I might've enjoyed it as I do tend to be tenacious when I'm hunting.)

 

So, I show up and look for the cache. Then if the only thing I've gotten out of it is that I've had the chance to sign the log and that's it, then what's the point?

 

Looking at the cache page doesn't always tell the story. There are some really beautiful cache pages on a series that I really have no desire to complete. They'll just have to sit there. That's not to mention many of the earlier caches are very sparse in the descriptions, but they are very good caches. Quality descriptions don't always correlate to quality caches.

 

In short, how am I suppose to know if I'm going to like it without doing it? Read the logs? Most of the time I don't read the logs until I need help.

Link to comment

Reading this thread was fun. It seems like everywhere there are people who need to bolster their egos by saying how truely great they are and how deficient others are. Saying a cache sucks can be another way to say, "Look how brilliant I am". Some of us have vast caching experience. Some are new. It is far better to provide a constructive comment like "The contents of your cache could be upgraded by...." or "The location might be improved by relocating to..." When I was new, I appreciated this type of comment. I would not have appreciated a comment that said, "You cache is weak, stupid, etc... :o

Link to comment
Finding the cache, isn't that the point?

Partly.

 

But think a minute. What is the whole point of geocaching? It's much more basic that just finding a box in the woods.

It's funny how virtually everyone says "I like seeing new places" and it's true.

 

The catch 22 is, those places where there for the finding before geocaching came along. However for most it took a box in the woods to get them there.

 

In the end I do think a lot of it's about the box. More than some might want to admit.

Link to comment
Finding the cache, isn't that the point?

Partly.

 

But think a minute. What is the whole point of geocaching? It's much more basic that just finding a box in the woods.

It's funny how virtually everyone says "I like seeing new places" and it's true.

 

The catch 22 is, those places where there for the finding before geocaching came along. However for most it took a box in the woods to get them there.

 

In the end I do think a lot of it's about the box. More than some might want to admit.

that sums it up for me.

 

This arguement is a classic in all hobbies/trades/pasttimes....etc.

 

its clearly evident in offroad circles, scrapbook circles, quilting societies, cooking, clothing, home decorating...

 

what should the gold standard be? Usually, we choose our way as the gold standard because that is what makes us feel good. and anybody not towing our line indeed inflates our opinion that we have set or following the standard.

 

the easiest way to deal with this is realize the game we play on the path we choose to play is not everybody's gold standard. the quicker we realize this the happier we will be.

 

and here is some other advice from my dad: "You can never win a gut battle"

Link to comment
You miss my point.  Why do you geocache?  Think beyond the incrementing of a find count, the trading, the hunt, or even the camaraderie.  What do you get out of it?

Find count is not it, 2 years and just over 100 finds ... I very seldom trade, although it's been known to happen ... I cache alone so no camaraderie on the hunt ...

 

Oops, I missed one ... No I didn't :o The hunt is the only reason I do it. Finding the location, and then finding the box. I'm not interested in my surroundings during the hunt, I'm gonna be looking at my GPS.

 

Having a hike or a scene is great, but there are some of us that aren't in it for that. Regardless of how easy it is, I don't know where it's at when I leave the house. Hopefully I will when I return home.

 

Once the puzzle has been solved, the mountain has been climbed, the trail has been hiked, the scene has been seen and the bush has been whacked ..... my fun begins.

 

7

Edited by SeventhSon
Link to comment
I think you guys need to agree you disagree.

 

Each of you (read that as all of us) has an absolute level of "highbrow" that agrees with how you want the game to be played by both hider and seeker. Neither opinion will meet in the middle because of that absolute level.

 

I think Snoogan's point is there seems to be a small section of folks who think more rules and guidelines should be set to eliminate or limit the types of caches they think are lame or tedious because they think they know better than the rest of the players what a quality cache is.

 

Look at it this way... Checkers is an oversimplified version of Chess. Not entirely accurate, but there are similarities, and that is how Geocaching is played. Some people think checkers is pretty lame, whereas chess is mondo (and vice verse), and you will have that same opinion set in Geocaching.

 

The really cool part about this game is it doesn't really matter what level you're at or think of certain caches. There is somebody out there that really enjoys them.

Well, I think T-lake summed it up..... AGAIN! :P

 

I hafta admit that I really enjoyed this debate. More than a couple people asked me about it at an event this past weekend and it made for a fairly long conversation between a small crowd of people on both sides of the fence. I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree on this one. Heck, I never learned much from someone that agreed with me anyway. :D

Link to comment

First of all, good thread. good self-control, everyone.

 

Secondly: If this sport were bowling, ....well, in bowling, what would their individual preferences be??? "I don't bowl in alley 3 because the pins are balsa wood.", "I want an alley with rugged terrain." Point: this sport offers a "freedom" which allows a lot of tastes. Frankly, I don't really understand some tastes, but I'm not spending much time trying to convince everyone to agree with me. (I do worry a bit that there will be a "negative kickback" from some urban practices when police get involved) - (or from badly-placed caches in protected places).

 

On the other side of the coin, one of our group brought a new girlfriend with him. It was her first outing and come to find out; It wasn't exactly her type of fun and I'll leave it at that. Let's just say that their child was born half muggle.
The term would be "mudblood."

 

Lastly: It has already been noted that the info on gc should usually be enough so that you can refine your search and ignore the rest. Yes, I can understand how someone who has been caching 4+ years might feel a bit violated by what is happening these days in the sport, and contaminated by an influx of "regular" people, but since he doesn't own the sport he will have to adjust. I can also understand how someone with a lot of enthusiasm for the sport would see many desirable horizons of possible activity, and feel "too restrained" by the imposed limitations, but since he doesn't own the sport he will have to adjust.

Link to comment
OMG! :laughing:

 

Who'da thunkt me & El D would ever think alike?

Scary ain't it? :rolleyes::laughing:

 

El Diablo

 

I have coined a term to help folks cope with this phenomenon:

 

Snooganicity: The sudden realization that you are thinking like Snoogans. :laughing:

 

Yes. I'm answering a 2 year old post to bump my old thread. I think it's time has come back around.

 

Here's the reason why I bumped this old thread.

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment
OMG! :laughing:

 

Who'da thunkt me & El D would ever think alike?

Scary ain't it? :rolleyes::laughing:

 

El Diablo

 

I have coined a term to help folks cope with this phenomenon:

 

Snooganicity: The sudden realization that you are thinking like Snoogans. :laughing:

 

Yes. I'm answering a 2 year old post to bump my old thread. I think it's time has come back around.

 

Here's the reason why I bumped this old thread.

You quoted yourself from an ancient thread, so you bumped the thread?

 

whatever.

Link to comment
OMG! :laughing:

 

Who'da thunkt me & El D would ever think alike?

Scary ain't it? :laughing::laughing:

 

El Diablo

 

I have coined a term to help folks cope with this phenomenon:

 

Snooganicity: The sudden realization that you are thinking like Snoogans. :rolleyes:

 

Yes. I'm answering a 2 year old post to bump my old thread. I think it's time has come back around.

 

Here's the reason why I bumped this old thread.

You quoted yourself from an ancient thread, so you bumped the thread?

 

whatever.

 

From your quote:

Yes. I'm answering a 2 year old post to bump my old thread. I think it's time has come back around.

 

All the recent threads that touch on this subject just begged for its return..... :D

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment

High•brow: Of, relating to, or being highly cultured or intellectual: as in- They only attend highbrow events such as the ballet or the opera.

n.

One who possesses or affects a high degree of culture or learning.

 

The geocaching "Highbrow" movement is really perplexing to me. Sometimes it really seems to me that some people actually think EVERY single cache MUST take them to some fantastic place with an exotic view and convenient parking and be filled with precious jewels. If not well, the cache is just so much more geotrash. (Yea, yea, overstated but still...) Next comes the complaint thread that all caches that don't meet THEIR aesthetic be banned, or some new designation be given them so they can exclude them on their searches.

 

I think of these people as (I'm going to coin terms here, so remember where you heard them): The GPC Club, (for the Geo-Politically correct) and The ARG Club. (The Anal Retentive Geocachers Club.) Some belong to both clubs, but it's the latter that provide the most entertainment.

 

OK, we hear mottos like, "The language of location," and I think some of us take it a bit too literally.

 

Sheesh, this isn't rocket surgery. It's boxes of junk in the woods, or where ever someone sees fit to place one and can get it approved. Since when did EVERY single cache have to have some awesome intrinsic value to be worthwhile?

 

This is still high tech hide and seek. Isn't it? Not high tech, only traditional caches, in beautiful settings, with convenient parking, and sparkling restrooms, hide and seek.... Right? So what difference does it make who, what, when, where and especially why? If an approver found it worthy to be posted then I count myself lucky to have another choice of a cache to hunt, OR NOT to hunt if it doesn't seem like my kind of fun.

 

This is my favorite geocaching quote:

 

"Failure is a hard pill to swallow until you realize the only failure you can really have in this sport is the failure to enjoy yourself."

TotemLake 4/26/04

 

I think I'll go hide some urban micros now....... :D:laughing::laughing::laughing::huh::D

Snoogans, I decided to ignore your post. It was not high-brew enuf nor top-drawer enuf for me. sniff! :rolleyes:

Link to comment

I think I'll go hide some urban micros now....... :D :D :anibad::D:P:P

 

I agree I am a big fan of micro caches and find many of them to be more interesting and more fun to find. I think that if someone places a cache there is always some thought or meaning behind it. Yeah it is cool to have one that takes you to some exciting place. I have been placeing cahces in practice to place a level 5 difficulty urban plane site micro.

 

Cheers!

Link to comment

Well, to drop my $0.02 worth in....

 

I'm not terribly fond of micros or lightpole caches. I simply edited my Pocket Queries to eliminate them. I select the caches that I get the emotional buzz from finding and go after them. Guess what? I get the buzz and I don't complain.

 

As Snoogs or somebody else once said, no rocket science here. I take responsibility for my caches that I hide, and I also take responsibility for the caches that I seek.

Link to comment

Well, to drop my $0.02 worth in....

 

I'm not terribly fond of micros or lightpole caches. I simply edited my Pocket Queries to eliminate them. I select the caches that I get the emotional buzz from finding and go after them. Guess what? I get the buzz and I don't complain.

 

As Snoogs or somebody else once said, no rocket science here. I take responsibility for my caches that I hide, and I also take responsibility for the caches that I seek.

 

There are some micros out there that are well thought out and worth taking your time to find. I do agree that i am not a fan of the "lamp pole" micros but it you don't go for them you won't even have a chance to find a cool micro cache that gives that rush.

 

Here is an example of one of those caches.

 

Almost There

GCVBMP

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...94-d372eefae8ba

Link to comment

I think that my good friend Geo-Forrest-Gump, from the Anguillan Geocaching Association (AGA), said it best when we reached the geocache at the summit of K2... :anibad:

 

Geocaching is like a box of chocolates...

sometimes you a cherry cordial or a coconut-cluster {{{yum}}}...

sometimes you get a "spring-surprise"{{{ouch!}}}...

sometimes you get an orange creme {{{yawn}}}...

sometimes you get tripe 'n' treacle {{{EWWW!}}}

if you don't like certain kinds, you can easily avoid them through mimimal work...

 

Jamie - NFA

Edited by NFA
Link to comment

I'm judging the cache and the experience offered, not what one gets out of it.

 

Weren't you a so-called "Defender of Crap" in a previous thread that demanded "Geocaching Standards" be raised? :anibad:

 

- HauntHunters

No. I was a DoC. He was anti-DoC trying to make the game conform to his 'standards'.

I too was a DoC.

 

CR has a long history of telling people how to change the way they cache, the way they think, etc., to be "better", i.e. "more like him".

Link to comment

I'm judging the cache and the experience offered, not what one gets out of it.

 

Weren't you a so-called "Defender of Crap" in a previous thread that demanded "Geocaching Standards" be raised? :anibad:

 

- HauntHunters

No. I was a DoC. He was anti-DoC trying to make the game conform to his 'standards'.

I too was a DoC.

 

CR has a long history of telling people how to change the way they cache, the way they think, etc., to be "better", i.e. "more like him".

 

Well, I find him to be a worthy adversary. I have greatly enjoyed opposing his point of view (on many topics) without being offended by it. Even agreed with him a time or two.... :D

 

Does that make me a DoC? Because I still find some caches crappy. I just don't believe they have no value to the game.

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment
OMG! :anibad:

 

Who'da thunkt me & El D would ever think alike?

Scary ain't it? :D:P

 

El Diablo

 

I have coined a term to help folks cope with this phenomenon:

 

Snooganicity: The sudden realization that you are thinking like Snoogans. :D

 

Yes. I'm answering a 2 year old post to bump my old thread. I think it's time has come back around.

 

Here's the reason why I bumped this old thread.

 

Actually I printed it first...so it's really the El Diablo phenomenon. :P

 

El Diablo

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...
×
×
  • Create New...