Suggesting New Attributes

7.2k · January 19, 2005

Here's something that kind of tweaked a thought on the attributes.

You've got listed under permissions bicyles, atvs, etc., etc. Plus you have the "no" to indicate not allowed. On a trail you know probits everything but hiking, you would need to select each of the "no" whatevers to indicate this. (Personally, I've just not selected anything.)

What about an attribute to would negate a blanket "no" on all of those alternate forms of transport and have a "hiking only" attribute. (or "foot traffic only" or whatever.) This would cut out the need for a the complete selection of all of the other forms and roll it into one attribute.

Just a thought.

January 19, 2005

One suggestion to go along with the tick one is for mosquitoes or other bugs that will make it difficult to enjoy the experience without proper planning. Some areas are much worse than others, which is why I make the suggestion.

January 19, 2005

You should be able to select the ten most important attributes to show up on the cache page, and still be able to use all of the other ones. The others would not show up on the cache page but would still be searchable. Just my $0.02.

Yerocrg

January 19, 2005

When adding attributes to our caches today, we couldn't find any icon to indicate "torch required". This is often the case when a cache is hidden in a deep hole in a stone wall.

January 19, 2005

I second the notion for "stroller friendly" and "playground". That being said, let me also say...

I agree with Randy that things can get too carried away with icons! Too many of them will clutter the page, not be easily recognized (requiring a key) and folks may not take the time. Isn't the purpose to make it easier for hiders and seekers? Too many on one page may defeat the purpose. I'd prefer to see aprox 5 per page. Maybe 7 or 8, definately no more than 10 (I think that was a good limit to set). I suppose this could be a whole other thread: "how many icons".

I understand the icons are to be a general indication, and as such, some common sense should preval. Do we really need an icon for everything? For instance, ticks are potentially everywhere in the northeast, and as such, they could be added to all caches, but is it necessary? I would hope most people know to take precautions for this already. But I can see where this would be useful in other areas, or if you were visiting an area. Same with mosquitos...I mean this is hiking in the woods, folks. I can see a wildlife icon if there is a special consideration at the location (hawks commonly seen in the area). My hesitation is that people might overuse them and they become ineffective.

I would also think that if a "highway" or interstate icon is added, the parking may not be necessary. Parking "somewhere" is a given, just a matter of how far. I wasn't sure how to apply this icon.

Overall, I think an excellent job was done adding the attributes, and they are a great feature. Thanks for the improvement.

~katydid

January 19, 2005

The "Parking" icon sort of made me wonder when to use it...

Does it mean that there is parking close to the cache itself or parking close to the trailhead?

What is "close"?

9.4k · January 19, 2005

The "Parking" icon sort of made me wonder when to use it...

Does it mean that there is parking close to the cache itself or parking close to the trailhead?

What is "close"?

This thread is really about new attribute suggestions, not discussing existing ones. There is plenty of new attribute suggestions to make for this thread already.

Not that I don't agree with you. Try posting a new thread about the parking attribute.

3.9k · January 19, 2005

During a conversation with a caching buddy, this one came up.

RV friendly:

This attribute is used to indicate that the cache is accessible by large vehicles, in particular Motorhomes, large 5th wheels, vehicles with trailers, etc. This attribute would imply that parking and ample turnaround space is available at the obvious parking area for this cache.

7.2k · January 19, 2005

During a conversation with a caching buddy, this one came up.

RV friendly:

This attribute is used to indicate that the cache is accessible by large vehicles, in particular Motorhomes, large 5th wheels, vehicles with trailers, etc. This attribute would imply that parking and ample turnaround space is available at the obvious parking area for this cache.

Semi trucks!? Heck, no! Sissy will be wanting to cache without me!

"Here's one that says I can get my truck in there no problem."

ADDED: Besides I don't know if I'd trust it, anyway. Far too many people have no concept what it's like to drive a "Biggie Sized" vehicle. A Surburan or Excursion ain't one. It not just that you can get back there, but low lying limbs, utility wires, getting it turned around, and more. I'd probably ignore it.

Edited January 19, 2005 by CoyoteRed

1k · January 20, 2005

I second the notion for "stroller friendly" and "playground". That being said, let me also say...

...we can get carried away with icons! ...Too many on one page may defeat the purpose....

I understand the icons are to be a general indication, and as such, some common sense should preval. Do we really need an icon for everything?

I would also think that if a "highway" or interstate icon is added, the parking may not be necessary. Parking "somewhere" is a given, just a matter of how far. I wasn't sure how to apply this icon.

~katydid

I agree with you and Randy that this is heading for overkiill, and want to reiterate two things you mentioned as something to be considered before suggesting or implementing new icons:

1) The icons should be broadly applicable. In other words, ask yourself if there's an existing icon that can reasonably represent the icon you're about to suggest. For example, if a cache is handicap accessible, it's stroller friendly, and if it's not, it's probably not. Or, use the tick icon to represent biting insects in general, not just ticks. An icon for dangerouss animals can apply to all dangerous animals, without the need for each type of animal to have it's own icon. The icons are not a substitute for cache descriptions (which can and should specify the type of biting insect, dangerous animal, etc if it's worth mentioning). A little generalization goes a long way in avoiding icon overkill and defeating the purpose!

2) Also consider the norms of geocaching. We shouldn't need to specify something with an icon when it is assumed or common sense dictates it, e.g. many caches are hidden in dark crevices - if you don't want to blindly reach in, you should carry a flashlight (torch) in your backpack for all caches! If we take norms into account, the only problem may be where norms are unclear (e.g. parking "nearby"), and that may require some definition of the norm or the icon, but not five icons (for parking at five different distances)!! :huh:

3.9k · January 20, 2005

During a conversation with a caching buddy, this one came up.

RV friendly:

This attribute is used to indicate that the cache is accessible by large vehicles, in particular Motorhomes, large 5th wheels, vehicles with trailers, etc. This attribute would imply that parking and ample turnaround space is available at the obvious parking area for this cache.

Semi trucks!? Heck, no! Sissy will be wanting to cache without me!

"Here's one that says I can get my truck in there no problem."

ADDED: Besides I don't know if I'd trust it, anyway. Far too many people have no concept what it's like to drive a "Biggie Sized" vehicle. A Surburan or Excursion ain't one. It not just that you can get back there, but low lying limbs, utility wires, getting it turned around, and more. I'd probably ignore it.

Good point. As a friend explained, it would be nice to know that you have a chance of getting that beast turned around. It would also be good to know you can't get it turned around anywhere neaby also.

As far as trusting attributes, I would put that in the same catagory as terrain ratings. I think they will stabalize, and get corrected and brought to some sort of normality over time. This community is great for that. There may be some jokers that will post "parking nearby" on an island cache, but those do tend to sort out.

1.1k · January 20, 2005

I very much like the new attributes feature and it seems like we will be seeing some revision and elaboration. As folks comment, I hope everyone keeps in mind that we do not need every possible cache characteristic iconized or categorized. We need to balance the need for information with the need for mystery. Geocaching is about mystery and exploration. I am happy to see those things eliminated or clarified that can be dangerous or a nuisance, but let’s not eliminate surprise and mystery.

January 20, 2005

I first want to say the attributes are awesome!!!!!!!!!! :huh:

I can't wait till I can filter out using attributes when doing PQs :huh:

I would like to throw my two cents in on:

1. 4x4 cache. I agreee with the earlier posts about moving 4x4 from the allowed/not allowed value to required or not required. My brother recently built up a trail ready cherorkee with all the toys. when we go caching together we are going to be sure to want to seek out caches that require 4x4. On the flip side when I am out caching in the family minivan I would like to filter out 4x4 required caches as to not waste my time reading about them.

2. the post earlier about dangerous animals. I think that should be kept general under dangerous area. Then of course the cacher would read the cache description to learn about the danger. Weather that danger might be flash flooding, dangerous pedators, snakes, falling rocks, mud slides etc.... we certainly don't want to have an attribute for every kind of danger

3. Park and Grab = cache is less than 500ft from parking.

1k · January 20, 2005

...the post earlier about dangerous animals. I think that should be kept general under dangerous area. Then of course the cacher would read the cache description to learn about the danger. Weather that danger might be flash flooding, dangerous pedators, snakes, falling rocks, mud slides etc.... we certainly don't want to have an attribute for every kind of danger.

I agree! A single danger icon, colored to make it stand out, placed first in the icons shown on the page, covering all potential dangers, which are then specified in the cache description. An elegant solution.

January 21, 2005

How about an attribute for "Just Do It!"?

January 21, 2005

I agree that a "danger" icon should be colred so that it stands out and that It should be a "blanket" symbol weather the danger is snakes, predators, rockslides etc. The owner of the cache should also put the reason for the attribute PROMINANTLY in the cache description.

January 21, 2005

In a way, I'm surprised Jeremy's lawyers allowed the "hazards" options.

My worry for geocaching is that one of these days, someone is going to get bitten by a tick (or worse) and sue Groundspeak, and maybe the cache hider, despite the disclaimer that we geocache at our own free will and peril.

With the new attributes, we have an option to warn about ticks (and other dangers). Some day, a plaintiff's attorney is going to argue that there was an opportunity to warn about ticks or whatever, but the opportunity was not used because the cache hider did not add an available attribute to the cache page.

I hope I'm wrong. Any members of the plaintiff's bar out there able to calm my worries?

1k · January 21, 2005

With the new attributes, we have an option to warn about ticks (and other dangers). Some day, a plaintiff's attorney is going to argue that there was an opportunity to warn about ticks or whatever, but the opportunity was not used because the cache hider did not add an available attribute to the cache page.

We've always had the opportunity to warn others about hazards - it's called the cache description. Having an attribute for hazards doesn't change the liability situation, and the mere existence of a hazard doesn't make the cache owner or gc.com liable.

Liability revolves around:

negligence - the failure to act as a reasonable person would under the circumstances
damages (an actual loss suffered by another person), and
proximate cause (that one person's negligence directly caused the other person's damages).

All three elements must be shown to establish liability, and the failure of the person who suffers the damage to act as a reasonable person would is also relevant in mitigating damages (i.e. they're responsible for their own stupidity).

One could argue that failing to warn others about a known and significant hazard in the cache description is negligence, but the mere presence or absence of attribute icon on the cache page wouldn't make much difference IMO.

By making the hazard attribute available, I also would guess that gc.com has decreased their potential for liability (ever so slightly), because they've given users yet another means to warn and be warned!

So, if you want to avoid being sued, make sure you act as a reasobable person would and describe significant hazards in your cache descriptions, regardless of whether you use the attributes.

PS - I have many years experience in risk management, but I am not an attorney and I am not offering a legal opinon here (that would be illegal)! Operate at your own risk... :laughing:

9.4k · January 22, 2005

Read the text to the right of this icon:

Every page has a danger icon.

January 22, 2005

To also go with my previous suggestion about TB hotels and local favorites for tourist cachers:

Close to Airport

I find a lot of people use my TB Hotel near the airport quite a lot (I replaced one which had been muggled), even though there is a really nice muggle-proof one which Bamboozle has off the Interstate in a nice neighborhood - I think travelers must look for ones specifically near the airport first.

9.4k · January 22, 2005

To also go with my previous suggestion about TB hotels and local favorites for tourist cachers:

Close to Airport

I find a lot of people use my TB Hotel near the airport quite a lot (I replaced one which had been muggled), even though there is a really nice muggle-proof one which Bamboozle has off the Interstate in a nice neighborhood - I think travelers must look for ones specifically near the airport first.

Isn't this something that could be figured out by doing a coordinate search from the airport? I see why you want it but don't want to duplicate existing solutions that work just as well.

2.3k · January 23, 2005

The comments about the 'danger' icon are good. I mearly suggested the big cat/bear one to coincide with the others in the 'hazards' section. If there is no need for distinction for dangerous areas except in the cache description, wouldn't that render ALL of the other 'hazards' icons superfluous? I have actually used the snake icon on one of my caches. Not because there are poisonous snakes nearby, but there seems to be a few non poisonous ones. I just wanted to make people aware of it, seeing as some people are VERY afraid of snakes.

January 23, 2005

I like the idea of the "historic area" icon on 9key's "selector" program. As a matter of fact, the "selector" had many good attribute icons. any chance we'll see all the ones that were on there transferred to the gc.com icons?

January 23, 2005

To also go with my previous suggestion about TB hotels and local favorites for tourist cachers:

Close to Airport

I find a lot of people use my TB Hotel near the airport quite a lot (I replaced one which had been muggled), even though there is a really nice muggle-proof one which Bamboozle has off the Interstate in a nice neighborhood - I think travelers must look for ones specifically near the airport first.

Isn't this something that could be figured out by doing a coordinate search from the airport? I see why you want it but don't want to duplicate existing solutions that work just as well.

Attributes: I've read a lot about them, but don't know if I understand correctly - I'll summarize my current feeling about using them based on how I cache, and how I see others cache.

Purpose: Cache attributes to me seem like a shorthand - an efficient way to give quick summary information about a cache in standard and common categories. Eventually there will be searching and GPX support.

How I cache: As a paperless cacher, I will mainly be using them on hunts when they are in the GPX. When I organize out of town trips right now, I have a few saved locations in GSAK and start to bring in pocket queries before the trip to build a history. I use filters and plot the points on MapPoint or in Mapopolis on the PDA.

How others cache: At our recent event cache, there are still a lot of paper-based cachers and people who use the queries and searches from gc.com - the problem is I don't know how they use that solution - I have never even owned a traditional GPS - I use a PDA and wireless GPSr.

So until GPX is available, my only real interest in attributes is putting good attributes on my existing caches, and encouraging our local hiders to update theirs in a way which will help the most people visiting our local caches - the majority of whom who are not GSAK users. Unfortunately, I have not got access to their search behavior - some really good information could probably be gleaned from the gc.com logs about typical cacher search behavior - but I don't have that info.

So how should I use attributes on my cache?: As a cache owner, my motivation is to give people good information about my caches and what they need to know and what they will get out of them. I don't know if people go to the trouble of finding and inputting airport coordinates in ther searches - that could be determined by a query on the gc.com logs. I know that I always used the zipcode of the hotel where I'd be staying before I had GSAK - now that I have GSAK, it might be one of my locations which I filter on to add to my hitlist. I didn't see a search by airport code on the web site.

I guess it all comes down to what questions do people ask about caches and what questions will they use search to answer when that is available?

I thought this might be one of those questions - only gc.com has the information to determine actual cacher behavior - and to be honest I don't feel the forums is the best way to find that out.

January 24, 2005

I was just emailing about a cache listing where it's important for cachers to read the page, it occurred to me an "i" icon (important info in description) might be useful.

Sure, mystery and offset caches usually start with "IMPORTANT: THE ABOVE COORDS ARE NOT THE CACHE" so downloaders might be made aware--but in other cases (if not abused) it could draw attention of those who typically don't read descriptions.

In this case it's a standard multicache.

(In future searching, it would also mean if folks just want to download they could avoid caches with the "i"...presuming the search will let you filter a 'not' condition...)

Always thinking,

Randy

January 24, 2005

During a conversation with a caching buddy, this one came up.

RV friendly:

This attribute is used to indicate that the cache is accessible by large vehicles, in particular Motorhomes, large 5th wheels, vehicles with trailers, etc. This attribute would imply that parking and ample turnaround space is available at the obvious parking area for this cache.

Semi trucks!? Heck, no! Sissy will be wanting to cache without me!

"Here's one that says I can get my truck in there no problem."

ADDED: Besides I don't know if I'd trust it, anyway. Far too many people have no concept what it's like to drive a "Biggie Sized" vehicle. A Surburan or Excursion ain't one. It not just that you can get back there, but low lying limbs, utility wires, getting it turned around, and more. I'd probably ignore it.

Good point. As a friend explained, it would be nice to know that you have a chance of getting that beast turned around. It would also be good to know you can't get it turned around anywhere neaby also.

As far as trusting attributes, I would put that in the same catagory as terrain ratings. I think they will stabalize, and get corrected and brought to some sort of normality over time. This community is great for that. There may be some jokers that will post "parking nearby" on an island cache, but those do tend to sort out.

I was thinking of this when I started reading this thread. I agree, I never cache from the Freightliner, but I have run a few coordinates to see if anything is inside a mile of where I am, Never had any luck to date, but I never go anywhere any more either.

On the 4x4 required, how about having check boxes next to 4x4, ATV, Motorcycle, etc, The boxes would be for allowed, not allowed, and only. Might make it a little more complicated, but almost everybody understand the big red line thru a picture as being a not allowed, but not sure how to show only in a picture.

January 24, 2005

I would recommend ones for bears, wolves and (big) cats, perhaps just one covering all? Large predators?

I fourth the suggestion for adding bear and/or mountain lions to the attributes. Several of my caches already warn of bear and mtn lions in the descriptions.

1.3k · January 24, 2005

I would recommend ones for bears, wolves and (big) cats, perhaps just one covering all? Large predators?

I fourth the suggestion for adding bear and/or mountain lions to the attributes. Several of my caches already warn of bear and mtn lions in the descriptions.

I think "Large Predator" might be the way to go. In my area we have black bear and alligators.

sd

9.1k · January 24, 2005

I would recommend ones for bears, wolves and (big) cats, perhaps just one covering all? Large predators?

I fourth the suggestion for adding bear and/or mountain lions to the attributes. Several of my caches already warn of bear and mtn lions in the descriptions.

I think "Large Predator" might be the way to go. In my area we have black bear and alligators.

sd

In my area we have cars that back into the spaces at out-of-the-way parking lots.

2.5k · January 24, 2005

Read the text to the right of this icon:

Every page has a danger icon.

Is that new, btw? I don't recall seeing it until fairly recently.

9.1k · January 24, 2005

Read the text to the right of this icon:

Every page has a danger icon.

Is that new, btw? I don't recall seeing it until fairly recently.

Yes, that's new. The warning text was always there, but it got reformatted to make room for the attribute icons, followed by the list of travel bug icons. The warning text used to bleed over into a list with more than 5 or so travel bugs on it, which was annoying. The change, which also added the danger icon, came at the same time when attributes were introduced.

January 24, 2005

I like this one

.

'cause it looks alot like me (cloned)

1.3k · January 24, 2005

In my area we have cars that back into the spaces at out-of-the-way parking lots.

Luckily we don't have many of those kinds of predators around here... but a few of our cachers have ran into them when caching out of state....

Perhaps a "backed in car" icon is in order? :sad:

sd

January 25, 2005

I almost suggested one several days ago, then realized there already is a flagrante delicto icon...

Heh,

Randy

February 5, 2005

Bring your own writing implement

edit: never looked at the other logs, [Homer voice]doh![/Homer voice]

Edited February 5, 2005 by Team Northern Nerds

February 5, 2005

it is a real treat to find a cache located in a remote part of park where you can see a deer.

You want to see deer? come and look at my backyard!! <_<

February 7, 2005

Regarding the idea of a "large predator" attribute: I think this is a good idea, and here's why: One of the most important purposes of the cache listing is to help the cacher make sure he's prepared for what he'll face out there. When I see the "danger" attribute, I think there might be a cliff I could fall off or something like that. But with large predators, I might want to pack heat on this trip, just in case.

That said, I'm not sure when I'd use it. In my area, you nearly ALWAYS face the possibility of running into black bears or alligators or whatever, but you only rarely actually do and almost never does it pose a problem when you do -- you go your way, the predator goes his. There's basically no reason for concern. I dunno what types of areas others might hide caches in where the cacher seriously needs to be concerned about such things.

February 7, 2005

After much discussion on the "Available for Adoption" idea, I'd like to weigh in. I think something definitely needs to be done to facilitate the adoption of caches, but I don't think an attribute is it. Rather, I think it needs to be something that shows up on the Cache Search listing, the way TB's and Geocoins do. That way, whenever someone pulls up the standard search for caches within 100 miles of his home, the ones that are available for adoption are highlighted. Hence, the cacher who wasn't even thinking about adoption will be prodded.

February 7, 2005

I know there's an attribute for "Boat Required". I'd like to suggest an attribute for "may use boat." I have placed several caches that could conveniently be reached by boat, sometimes more conveniently than on foot, but the boat is not REQUIRED. I don't own a boat, have placed all these by hiking to the spot. But when it's near the edge of a large lake, for example, and a real trudge to get to on foot, some cachers might like to know that they can get there by boat. And they might like to know that they can put the boat in the water and go around the edge of the lake and pick up several caches in one trip.

February 23, 2005

...It appears there is an unlimited amount of 'Attributes' that could be incorporated into the pages from " Danger Mother-in Law seen here" .....to "Watch out for falling Coconuts" so that there would be no room left on the page for useful information.!!!......... (baby stroller friendly???)

If there is a particular situation, good or bad, it can be added on the page description and possibly highlighted with color or bold print as to the virtues of an area where the cache is located.

I try to post pictures and information as to why I chose this location and let the "PEOPLE DECIDE" if they like to visit this cache or just go for numbers.

Building my pages can be just as much fun and challenge as creating a cache.

Note: I would still like to see a bit wider margin too Jeremy.

February 25, 2005

IMHO there is one very useful attribute missing:

"English description available"

Imaginge you are travelling through old Europe and would like to look

for some caches there. You'll face the following situation:

- some cache descriptions are in English

- some are in English and in the local language

- some are in the local language but contain a remark that the

owner will send you an english description on request

- some are in the local language only

Try to imaginge how much fun it is to find the caches with english descriptions

with the current search engine

Of course it does not make much sense to have this attribute unless you can

use it as a filter for searches.

April 4, 2005

I personally love the attributes feature, but I noticed quickly with the post of my first cache that there is an atribute I'd like to see posted: Dangerous Insects

True, ticks could be broadly applicable, but out here in the Conejo Valley there are hundreds of thousands of Black Widow spiders, which are basically cache spiders in my opinion. We cachers are always searching for innovative and withdrawn places to hide caches, and these good ole' insects are doing practically the same exact thing.

Microcaches are especially vulnerable to being placed in areas that attract dangerous insects such as the Black Widow. Could we expand on the Ticks avatar and perhaps add one for dangerous insects?

2.5k · April 4, 2005

I was considering starting a new thread on this, but since it was bumped I shall add my suggestion of a camera icon to indicate that a camera might be wanted. I know that the scenic view icon might will cover that, but in some cases the area is one that draws cameras, but does not have the view that I would think that a scenic view would be. Maybe just changing the name to scenic vista would do the job although I think a camera icon would convey that more than the scenic view icon that is currently there.

I also wonder about using the restroom icon when the facility is really just a portable toilet.

Both of these issues came up on a new cache I just submitted. The cache is in a garden that really doesn't give you any distant views, but it is very pretty. There are also portable toilets and not a regular restroom. I used the scenic view icon and left off the restroom icon.

1.6k · April 4, 2005

I personally love the attributes feature, but I noticed quickly with the post of my first cache that there is an atribute I'd like to see posted: Dangerous Insects

True, ticks could be broadly applicable, but out here in the Conejo Valley there are hundreds of thousands of Black Widow spiders, which are basically cache spiders in my opinion. We cachers are always searching for innovative and withdrawn places to hide caches, and these good ole' insects are doing practically the same exact thing.

Microcaches are especially vulnerable to being placed in areas that attract dangerous insects such as the Black Widow. Could we expand on the Ticks avatar and perhaps add one for dangerous insects?

Yes, dangerous insects would be a good attribute. Sometimes here in Washington, especially in the summer, we get nasty bee and hornet nests.

3.9k · April 4, 2005

I was considering starting a new thread on this, but since it was bumped I shall add my suggestion of a camera icon to indicate that a camera might be wanted. I know that the scenic view icon might will cover that, but in some cases the area is one that draws cameras, but does not have the view that I would think that a scenic view would be. Maybe just changing the name to scenic vista would do the job although I think a camera icon would convey that more than the scenic view icon that is currently there.

Are there experienced cachers that don't have at least one camera?

I also wonder about using the restroom icon when the facility is really just a portable toilet.

I have always assumed that this included portable toilets. Portables and thier permanatnt counterparts are very popular at the trailheads. To me, this attribute only means that you don't have to find a tree/bush to hide behind.

Another way to look at it is that Restroom + Water available attributes may indicate flush toilets, although that isn't always the case either.

2.5k · April 4, 2005

I was considering starting a new thread on this, but since it was bumped I shall add my suggestion of a camera icon to indicate that a camera might be wanted. I know that the scenic view icon might will cover that, but in some cases the area is one that draws cameras, but does not have the view that I would think that a scenic view would be. Maybe just changing the name to scenic vista would do the job although I think a camera icon would convey that more than the scenic view icon that is currently there.

Are there experienced cachers that don't have at least one camera?

I have a camera, but don't normally carry it, especially for urban caches.

3.9k · April 4, 2005

<snip>
Are there experienced cachers that don't have at least one camera?

I have a camera, but don't normally carry it, especially for urban caches.

Sorry, I was being a bit of a smart a** with my response, in a humurous lighthearted sort of way.

Since I have started caching, I do try to take my camera wherever I go, caching or not. I have learned that photo ops come a lot more frequently than we would normally realize. I just gotta remember to take the camera out of my pocket and use it!

To be honest, knowing that a camera would be a big bonus on a cache is good to know, but I don't think I wouldn't remember my camera because of an attribute, and I certainly wouldn't set up a PQ to include/exclude a cache based on that. There are those that might, perhaps they will chime in.

8.9k · April 4, 2005

I believe there can be a problem with having too many attributes to choose from. An endless list would make it so that no one would even bother. What about having an attribute where you won't have to go off paved trails? What about having an attribute where the cacher hid the cache on a Tuesday?

Looking down the road, Jeremy has indicated that soon we'll be able to query against these attributes - Kid Friendly caches only, only caches that are available 24/7, only caches that specifically allow dogs, etc.

The way I look at suggesting an attribute is - would the attribute be something you'd want to be able to query against? I'm not sure carrying a camera falls into that level.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't tell people about the possibility of wonderful pictures, but if we encourage people to always bring their camera along, we'll get shots like this more often:

Click to Enlarge

April 7, 2005

Is this thread even still monitored for possible attribute updates?

1.6k · April 12, 2005

I would like to suggest an Attribute to identify

Cache is part of a Series.

It seems to me that a lot of caches depend upon finding several caches and get some form of information from each, or a set of caches across a region are related in some way.

I'm not a 'graphics guy' so I can't create one to post for example so I'll try using words.

I would make a chain of links in the shape of an "S"

I myself have three series, and am involved in 2 more 'multi cacher' series.

This would save those people that don't want to have that level of commitment, or are visiting on vacation, from seaching them and feeling they missed out.

Also those that enjoy this level of challenge would be able, in the future, to create PQ's to plan weekends or vacations around a series.

The Blue Quasar

Suggesting New Attributes

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment