Jump to content

Why So Many Micros?


VentureForth

Recommended Posts

The difference is that there's no way not to hear the guy who's talking during the movie, and it can be hard to avoid the person who's blocking you in traffic, but you can easily avoid urban micros if you don't like them.

My beef isn't about urban micros. My beef is with lame caches.

 

Unfortunately, there is no filter for those.

 

Also, I take it from the quote that as long as you can avoid rude behavior rude behavior is perfectly acceptable?

Link to comment
My beef isn't about urban micros. My beef is with lame caches.

after repititious statement ad nauseum does anyone still not know, or care, what CR's beef is? I thought you left here for terracaching anyway?

 

I like lightpole caches. I think the 6 or so that I have found just by reaching out the car window were funny and fun! I like traditionals I can get to within 5 mins. of my car. I like evil micros that really make you think. Sometimes I like a geocache that you have to walk four hours to get to...I don't care what size it is, it's about the walk, not the cache!

 

I have found 1000+ caches in nine states and only one was "bad" because it was in a dangerous location (steep hill, trash pile, broken glass and such).

 

I LOVE Nashville caching.

 

I have a micro in the woods - all finders like it so far. I have a lightpole micro in a parking lot - all finders like it so far. I have a traditional that requires you to navigate 15 miles of back-country un-mapped dirt roads to get to, but then it's only 20' off the road - all finders like it so far!

 

Who are y'all to define the game? Quit chattering about how others play and go play your game!

 

Ya'll play YOUR game, I will play MINE - but your opinion of MY game is no more valid than mine is of YOURS!

 

Drop the control issues!

Link to comment
I have a micro in the woods - all finders like it so far. I have a lightpole micro in a parking lot - all finders like it so far. I have a traditional that requires you to navigate 15 miles of back-country un-mapped dirt roads to get to, but then it's only 20' off the road - all finders like it so far!

 

 

those people who say they enjoy these micros are like friends who tell you that your pink argyle socks look good with your blue pinstripe cardigan...

Link to comment
My beef isn't about urban micros. My beef is with lame caches.

after repititious statement ad nauseum does anyone still not know, or care, what CR's beef is? I thought you left here for terracaching anyway?

 

I like lightpole caches. I think the 6 or so that I have found just by reaching out the car window were funny and fun! I like traditionals I can get to within 5 mins. of my car. I like evil micros that really make you think. Sometimes I like a geocache that you have to walk four hours to get to...I don't care what size it is, it's about the walk, not the cache!

 

I have found 1000+ caches in nine states and only one was "bad" because it was in a dangerous location (steep hill, trash pile, broken glass and such).

 

I LOVE Nashville caching.

 

I have a micro in the woods - all finders like it so far. I have a lightpole micro in a parking lot - all finders like it so far. I have a traditional that requires you to navigate 15 miles of back-country un-mapped dirt roads to get to, but then it's only 20' off the road - all finders like it so far!

 

Who are y'all to define the game? Quit chattering about how others play and go play your game!

 

Ya'll play YOUR game, I will play MINE - but your opinion of MY game is no more valid than mine is of YOURS!

 

Drop the control issues!

We love them all too as I've said many times. It's just hard for some folks to understand just what a huge percentage WE are., If you don't like any one type of cache you can indeed keep from putting them on your itinerary. If, perish the thought, you accidentally happen onto one please....we won't hold it against you if you pass it on by.

Link to comment
I thought...

That's what you get for thinking.

 

I get that your idea of a good time is simply an increment of your find count. That doesn't mean the cache has to be junk to do that.

 

Oh, wait, I guess it does. If you have to get out of your car and maybe walk a few minutes to find a cache that'd slow you down too much. Heaven forbid the cache take you some place that you linger to actually enjoy the area. Oh, no, that'd cut into your drive to be "big dog" with your find count. I guess you like to be able to pick up a few cheap finds on your way to a decent cache.

 

Me, I'd rather get right with a decent hunt. I'd also like to not have to wade through your type of junk to find those decent hunts. I'd also like to know that new players aren't being put off because they don't know how to filter out the junk. I also like to know land stewards aren't finding this junk and decided this is not a game for their land.

Link to comment

Obviously, I support your right to place these caches, but why does it have to be a "huge" percentage? What if it's just a slight majority? What if it's just a substantial minority? I think it tends to vary from place to place, and time to time. And however the pendulum has swung in this time and place, things will continue to change.

 

It really shouldn't matter. Even if you micronauts were a tiny minority, you all should be able to seek and hide what you want.

 

The thing that bothers me with the "huge" is that - aside from the part that I think it overstates - I think it tends to reinforce the notion that the majority CAN stop any minority type of cache -- be it micros, puzzles, "dangerous" caches, etc. Hopefully, we can continue to have diversity, without relying on "huge" numbers to defend us.

Link to comment
My beef isn't about urban micros.  My beef is with lame caches.

 

Unfortunately, there is no filter for those.

 

Also, I take it from the quote that as long as you can avoid rude behavior rude behavior is perfectly acceptable?

Well, perhaps a useful "premium feature" would be a 1 to 10 checkbox that finders could use to rate their opinions of the caches they find.

 

Every cache page could then have an average "quality" that would give a clue to what others thought overall.

 

It would be a "GQR" (Geocachers' Quality Rating) - GQR=8.9 (wow!) or GQR=2.1 (ugggh!)

 

--Marc

February 12, 2005 @ 8:53 AM

N40° 46.565' W073° 58.756'

Edited by SilverMarc
Link to comment

I'm for some sort of rating system, but I'm not sure if it would help the problem.

 

Folks who like cheap hides will rate a junk cache high because they are the best ones to raise your find count without much effort. Some folks' satisfaction quotient is very high if the cache doesn't take you very far out of the way and it takes you less than 60 seconds to find, log, and be back in your car on the way to the next junk cache. :angry:

Link to comment

I like this thread, despite some heat. I am always interested in people's thoughts and ideas, and this is a recurring topic, so I want to understand it.

 

I did my first hundred or so caches alone, the vast majority were traditionals in interesting places. About that time the Alabama Geocachers Association was formed and I began to meet other geocachers.

 

Friendships developed and I started caching with others more than alone. Did another 100 or so with my new friends, and by this time a few micros were popping up in my area...some simple, some downright evil, all fun.

 

I joined a team at Cacheleague.com and now had a team of 10 competing nation-wide with other teams...for the first time numbers mattered! We chased every cache we could get to, but in a numbers competition long hikes are counter-productive, so we started chasing mostly micros.

 

In the South at that time chasing micros meant Nashville - so we loaded up and went on several cache runs - the first time we were in four cars and spent the constantly rainy weekend folowing each other from cache-to-cache, the next time we rented a Suburban and all piled in - this time we started at midnight Friday and cached till midnight Saturday non-stop for 189 caches! What a blast - most fun I ever had with my clothes on!

 

By the end of Cacheleague (we won!) we had all made great lifelong friends; we still cache together regularly though we live all over the state, and talk almost daily.

 

Groups of AGA friends travel to events all over the South, and anytime there's a wagon train we take part - 30+ of us from five states will make a cache run to Chattanooga this Saturday (Feb. 19th) and will try for 100 caches that day.

 

I have to say that cacheleague taught me that I don't enjoy caching competitions, and I wouldn't do it again. Cache runs with friends like the one I just described are a different matter - If you haven't spent 24 hours in a car with several people you barely know (if at all), hauling butt from cache to cache in an area you've never seen before, it's an absolute hoot and safe to say that after that experience everyone in the car will be friends! Well, one wasn't...she committed geocide as soon as she could get out of the car! But that's one of dozens.

 

Cacheleague taught me that numbers are meaningless, it's the experience that counts. As a result I have gotten really bad about logging my finds - I usually don't even keep records and rely on my (poor) memory and the logs of those I cache with. I probably log 3 out of 4 that I visit.

 

Several of my friends had or were about to pass 1000, and I didn't wanna be left behind, so I went up to Nashville's Reputation Reparation event and cache run, to get the 163 or so that put me at 999. OK, so maybe I'm a little competitive.

 

At the Reputation Reparation event 163 caches were picked up and archived by 30+ people in a 9-car wagon train, almost without exception micros. This was due directly to the loud complaints about lame micros that had earned Nashville the moniker "Cacheville".

 

I was terribly dissapointed, in two ways.

 

First, I have gotten to know a lot of the cachers that put these micros out, and I like and respect them. I hated to see them buckle under to a small but very vocal group that dissapproved of their caches.

 

Secondly, I loved finding these caches, and evidently by their popularity a whole lot of others did too! Most of those archived I had found on previous trips, as had my carload of friends, and we had a blast talking about the funny memories we had from originally hunting them. Wierd stuff happens when you group-cache!

 

Some of my favorites? The Way-Finding Signs series - 60 or so film cans velcroed to the back of directions signs all over the Vanderbilt campus. Lame hides? They weren't even hidden - you could see them as you drove down the street! Done alone they made for a great tour of the Vandy campus, done in a group they made for an excellent cache-dash, guaranteed to garner lots of laughs and memories.

 

And oh yeah - I chose the toughest traditional in my area for my 1000th - a six-hour slog through seriously muddy Jeep trails to a traditional at a lovely lake in the woods - I couldn't stand for 1000 to be a micro!

 

There are just so many ways to play this game, and they are all fun for somebody.

 

If this thread accomplishes anything I hope it's to get folks to play their game and leave everyone else's alone! We CAN all get along and there is NO "right" way to geocache!

 

Ed

Link to comment

A good argument for the retention of micros (not that I wanted a full ban).

 

So how can both player types co-exist? Some possibilities I see are

 

1. A policy change. The 528 foot rule only applies to caches of the same type. That is, micros must be 528 feet apart. And traditionals must be 528 feet apart. But a micro and a traditional can be closer than 528. The goal here is to prevent one type of cache from preempting the other type.

 

2. An attribute change or two. We already have the capability to filter out all micros. What is needed is a bit of fine tuning. The ability to filter out urban micros, or filter by peer rating/scores., or filter by person (ignore caches by people who habitually place "lame" caches -- i.e., per each person's definition). The goal here is to unclog the to-do lists and "radars" of the lame caches.

 

3. Track micro finds differently from "traditionals" or allow peer scoring. The goal here is to promote awareness and value of the traditional and quality caches. Or stated in the reverse, to prevent the flood of micros from drowning out the traditionals. This is probably the hardest goal of the three to accomplish. It seems rooted in human behavior and more difficult to handle procedurally.

 

I'm sure these ideas could be improved. I'd like to hear other suggestions, as long as they don't, in essence, boil down to "leave us alone" or similar sentiments.

Link to comment

Cacheleague taught me that numbers are meaningless, it's the experience that counts.

 

Several of my friends had or were about to pass 1000, and I didn't wanna be left behind,

 

At the Reputation Reparation event 163 caches were picked up

 

Some of my favorites? The Way-Finding Signs series - 60 or so film cans velcroed to the back of directions signs

 

And oh yeah - I chose the toughest traditional in my area for my 1000th -

 

You don't care about numbers? It sure doesn't seem that way from your posts.. someone who drove around picking up 60 film canisters attached to signs. In my mind, these aren't geocaches... no prize, no thought into planning, not tricks, just.... well, numbers!

Link to comment

Cacheleague taught me that numbers are meaningless, it's the experience that counts.

 

Several of my friends had or were about to pass 1000, and I didn't wanna be left behind,

 

At the Reputation Reparation event 163 caches were picked up

 

Some of my favorites? The Way-Finding Signs series - 60 or so film cans velcroed to the back of directions signs

 

And oh yeah - I chose the toughest traditional in my area for my 1000th -

 

You don't care about numbers? It sure doesn't seem that way from your posts.. someone who drove around picking up 60 film canisters attached to signs. In my mind, these aren't geocaches... no prize, no thought into planning, not tricks, just.... well, numbers!

What you didn't say about the WayFinding series is that it gave you a great 2 hour walk around the Vanderbilt campus and to the parthenon. We really enjoyed it. Thanks r0b

Link to comment
A good argument for the retention of micros (not that I wanted a full ban).

 

So how can both player types co-exist? Some possibilities I see are

 

1. A policy change. The 528 foot rule only applies to caches of the same type. That is, micros must be 528 feet apart. And traditionals must be 528 feet apart. But a micro and a traditional can be closer than 528. The goal here is to prevent one type of cache from preempting the other type.

 

2. An attribute change or two. We already have the capability to filter out all micros. What is needed is a bit of fine tuning. The ability to filter out urban micros, or filter by peer rating/scores., or filter by person (ignore caches by people who habitually place "lame" caches -- i.e., per each person's definition). The goal here is to unclog the to-do lists and "radars" of the lame caches.

 

3. Track micro finds differently from "traditionals" or allow peer scoring. The goal here is to promote awareness and value of the traditional and quality caches. Or stated in the reverse, to prevent the flood of micros from drowning out the traditionals. This is probably the hardest goal of the three to accomplish. It seems rooted in human behavior and more difficult to handle procedurally.

 

I'm sure these ideas could be improved. I'd like to hear other suggestions, as long as they don't, in essence, boil down to "leave us alone" or similar sentiments.

How can both player types coexist?????Every area I have cached in both player types coexist and enjoy each other immensely. I have seen no other way. Here in Raleigh, in Hampton Roads, in Nashville, in North and South Florida. Where are we talking about that the player types don't coexist???

Link to comment

I think it's crazy to argue about all this.... If you have gsak you can filter out micros. if you don't like micros don't find them. even on the search pages it tells you it's a micro. If you have a premium membership you can filter them with pocket queries. I love micros. they are usually very difficult to find and still fun. I cache for fun. I cache to do something other than watch tv. I cache for the thrill of seeing my number of finds go up. I don't care if i can trade unless i'm taking my kids.... in which case i search for a larger cache. It's my sport and my game and i play it the way i want I plan on hiding micros and large caches. They are all fun. If you want a hike look for a hike. most people put very good descriptions. don't complain because not everyone hates micros. All geocaches are good geocaches for someone... It's better than sitting at home doing nothing

 

Sorry for ranting so much!

Mudstuffin

Link to comment

Is it the size of the container that “traditionalists” object to or is it that people are “cheapening” the sport by placing lots of caches in easy to get to and easy to find places?

 

Just think, what if all those urban micro hunters were all tramping through the woods :)

Link to comment
Why oh why must we search for these little rolled up pieces of paper, for a stat, the thrill of finding one, "NOT"!!! I can't answer this question but we know what they say, "it's the thrill of the hunt and the joy of the outdoors. Recently we went through our book of caches that hadn't been found yet and we removed all the micros and 35mm canister caches from our book. When we go out all day and find 2 of the 9 micros for the day we got abit discouraged.

 

Yesturday, December 4th marks the first cache that my better half and I have put out and we made a pact to only put out caches that have trade items inside. It is more fun to trade items than just sign the log book and if you have kids with you, you know what I am talking about.

It's hard to believe it's me saying this just a few months ago. I have totally changed my tune now that I am a more experienced geocacher. Now I enjoy looking for micros and I broke my promise to never put out a micro. I placed my first micro cache on March 19th.

 

This just goes to show you that you shouldn't critisize what others enjoy doing even if at the time you don't like it.

 

I LEARNED MY LESSON !!!!!! :(:D:D:D:D

Link to comment
Why oh why must we search for these little rolled up pieces of paper, for a stat, the thrill of finding one,  "NOT"!!!  I can't answer this question but we know what they say, "it's the thrill of the hunt and the joy of the outdoors.  Recently we went through our book of caches that hadn't been found yet and we removed all the micros and 35mm canister caches from our book.  When we go out all day and find 2 of the 9 micros for the day we got abit discouraged. 

 

Yesturday, December 4th marks the first cache that my better half and I have put out and we made a pact to only put out caches that have trade items inside.  It is more fun to trade items than just sign the log book and if you have kids with you, you know what I am talking about.

It's hard to believe it's me saying this just a few months ago. I have totally changed my tune now that I am a more experienced geocacher. Now I enjoy looking for micros and I broke my promise to never put out a micro. I placed my first micro cache on March 19th.

 

This just goes to show you that you shouldn't critisize what others enjoy doing even if at the time you don't like it.

 

I LEARNED MY LESSON !!!!!! :D:):D:blink::)

Welcome to the "dark side" of caching. :D I love micros, the more devious, the better.

Link to comment

Sadly some people who have had more experience with geocaching for a long time expect more then a little pill bottle wrapped up, a log thrown in and placed somewhere rather quick and easy to find. They want the good decent caches that take them somewhere in nature and to be rewarded with prizes. I swing both ways when it comes to micro's just because I do own three of them, two of them are in locations that are either a great place to visit or have had micros there before that were a hit. I also do have a multi-cache where I spent about $20 on, including swag, the container, and a unused TB tag for a FTF prize

Link to comment
i personally don't mind micros so much as i do can placed with no imagination. at least with micros you have some creativity.

Some people don't have much imagination and the "lame" micro really is using what imagination they have. Chances are as they do more geocaching their imagination will grow. I don 't think it is any of our places to decide what is a good cache or not when the fact is that is our opinion not shared by everyone. There is no one right way to do anything even though there is a tendancy in this country to fit everyone into one mold. What is lame to one may not be lame to another and may not be lame to the same person on a different day. All any of us can say is whether we like a certain cache or not, we can't begin to decide for everyone. It's like the old Almond Joy/ Mounds commercials "sometimes I feel like a nut sometimes I don't. That describes my feelings about micros, some days I feel like hunting them some days I'd rather take a hike in the woods. To whoever said that obviously it IS about the numbers, it doesn't really matter whether it is or not, that is a personal choice. Having been on the Chattanooga Meet Alabama wagon train I really can understand how someone could participate in a cache run like that and not care about numbers, we had so much fun I would do it again if there were no logs or smileys involved. What I find is that hunting for caches whether they be micors or ammo cans is that it sharpens my mind and keeps me thinking and shows me places I have not seen before and introduces me to great people. The cache container is secondary. In summer when the snakes and ticks and poison ivy are abundant I will probably spend more time hunting micros and in the winter I will probably concentrate on caches in the woods. I don't ask anyone else to agree with me, this is my own preference and I don't expect it to be right for anyone but me. If you want to stick to traditional ammo can caches by all means do so but don't label others wrong or lame if they choose to do otherwise. If it offends you that "lame" micros exist and are counted then form another group devoted to only ammo can caches in the woods and keep your own records and make up your own rules.

Link to comment

Been a member since 02, but just this past year started getting into GX'ing more. Didn't even have my GPS til last year. Was interested in this kind of stuff because while I was in the military, I had to be able to read a map, so this comes almost naturally. BUT, if ya'll that live down in or around Pinellas County like these kinds of caches, look up one in particular. That would be A Lot of Trees

Hope that comes thru as a 'link'. Another reason I haven't posted until now. :lol::lol:

That was one of the best hidden micros I've found(after 3 tries, and short carreer), so far :lol::lol::lol:

Hope to see ya on the 'trail',

 

Retired Redleg & Missy Messy

Link to comment

It seems to me that the micro cache has become the answer to the lack of ability to place virtual caches with Geocaching.com these days.

 

Geocaching.com's policy is that you should not do a virtual cache to just see a park or some other interesting thing....it has to be mindblowing to qualify so now when a fellow cacher wants to share a cool spot that might be too public or urban, they use a micro instead.

 

I think this is hilarious because Geocaching.com's intention on limiting the placement of virtuals was to "keep to the cache in geocaching", which by the way does not have to be in an interesting spot, just has to be a traditional cache. Well, I don't think that micros really fit the bill of a traditional cache in the sense that they meant it, but if they are in an interesting spot or are imaginative, then I appreciate them.

 

I would love to see some more micros that are results of multicaches or puzzle caches. That would be fun. In fact some of the regular micros in my area are so close together, making them part of a multi cache would be really easy and then they might even meet the 1/2 mile requirement between caches that Geocaching.com claims to have.

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...