Locationless Caches

January 31, 2005

OK - You might say that I have not been doing this long enough, have too few posts to the forum or too few finds as well as no hides of my own so "What does he know?" This is not meant to be a bitch session only an observation. [On the other hand, perhaps it is - I have been doing this for awhile, have a varied set of finds and don't feel ready to place site caches]

I recently submitted a locationless/virtual cache hoping it would go through but it didn't.

My Cache

While I do understand the emphasis for location caches there is merit for the locationless - they can be used to document important events, actions, sites, etc that location caches can't. More over, they can be "across the globe" thus benefiting more than *the locals.*

It is my belief that this "game" is for the cohorts that choose to participate, and while there must be criteria, shouldn't that specifically be based on safety, content, density, and the like versus a few making the decision to close out a complete category of cache? If I am mistaken feel free to enlighten me, as I am sure some will.

I would like to see the moratorium lifted.

38.2k · January 31, 2005

Locationless caches really aren't geocaching. That being said, there are enough out there to satisfy those who like them. Here is a complete list. Enjoy!

Edited January 31, 2005 by briansnat

24.7k · January 31, 2005

Locationless caches are backwards from a normal cache. You seek out something based on a descriptin that could be about anywhere then report it's location. This site is set up for traditional caches.

Until the site can be re-vamped to handle the different format of locatinless there was a moratorium placed on approving them. The moratorium has proven to be indefinate but GC.com has not changed their intentsions on bringing them back when the site is revamped.

January 31, 2005

January 31, 2005

Locationless caches are about the dumbest cache anyone has ever devised. It makes no sense at all, its like hunting a ghost... Real caches with a log book and geostash is about the best type there is, next a good solid virtual cache depicting something of visual or emotional value. After all its all about the "hunt". I probably would not be interested in a micro, and I consider a locationless cache a non existent cache and won't waste my time on it....

Dale M.

24.7k · January 31, 2005

Locationless caches are about the dumbest cache anyone has ever devised. It makes no sense at all, its like hunting a ghost... Real caches with a log book and geostash is about the best type there is, next a good solid virtual cache depicting something of visual or emotional value. After all its all about the "hunt". ...

If it's the Hunt then you don't mind DNF's. If it's the Hunt, they you don't mind looking for the answer to the question of a virtual. If it's the hunt, then you won't mind looking for a round building in a world of angles.

If it's the find, well that's the box you find at the end of the hunt.

2.3k · January 31, 2005

Locationless caches are about the dumbest cache anyone has ever devised. It makes no sense at all, its like hunting a ghost... Real caches with a log book and geostash is about the best type there is, next a good solid virtual cache depicting something of visual or emotional value. After all its all about the "hunt". I probably would not be interested in a micro, and I consider a locationless cache a non existent cache and won't waste my time on it....

Dale M.

1167 finds, 31 targets, and 177 watchers on my "Dash for Cache" locationless. Wonder if they would agree with you?

7.2k · January 31, 2005

Locationless caches are about the dumbest cache anyone has ever devised. It makes no sense at all, its like hunting a ghost... Real caches with a log book and geostash is about the best type there is, next a good solid virtual cache depicting something of visual or emotional value. After all its all about the "hunt". ...

If it's the Hunt then you don't mind DNF's. If it's the Hunt, they you don't mind looking for the answer to the question of a virtual. If it's the hunt, then you won't mind looking for a round building in a world of angles.

If it's the find, well that's the box you find at the end of the hunt.

My personal problem with locationless caches is the original idea of geocaching was to find something using stated or revealed coordinates. Locationless, or more accurately "reverse," caches you don't use a GPS to find an object.

While you can do a bunch of research to complete a locationless, many times you happen across them. So, where's the hunt in that? "Oh, hey, a prymid. Let's take a pic and see if it's already been found."

We did a few and simply didn't get anything out of it.

I understand that Jeremy et. al is working on a better mechanism for virts and that's fine. Personally, I think benchmarks are a better fit for hunting things with a GPS than locationlesses.

January 31, 2005

I use them as fun while driving between caches keeps the little ones busy. Espically since my area is not flooded with caches.

I personally would like to see it lifted, maybe limited tho to how many a person can make or how many a mon made or both.

Example

1 per user forever

or

Limit it to the first 5 or so listed that mon.

Edited January 31, 2005 by 4 WheelDrive Fun

7.2k · January 31, 2005

I would like to see the moratorium lifted.

Hey there,

I think Jeremy has addressed your concerns in another topic. He was talking about virtual caches, but also touched on locationless caches too. I hope this helps with your questions and concerns.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...0entry1265992

I think, ultimately, there are three points:

1. Virtuals have a right to exist.

2. Geocaching.com was not designed for virtual (or locationless) caches.

3. There is a solution in the works which will improve functionality around virtual (and locationless) caches.

The solution is pretty close but from past experience I do not make deadlines anymore. We're just too small for that.

1.5k · January 31, 2005

There are also alternative listing sites that currently allow for more flexibility in cache types. If geocaching.com limits the kinds of caches you'd like to place, you can always check out some of the other sites too.

Different sites can implement their own rules and appeal to those with different interests.

January 31, 2005

Locationless caches really aren't geocaching. That being said, there are enough out there to satisfy those who like them. Here is a complete list. Enjoy!

How is this list gathered ? Whenever I do a pocket query for locationless caches in one or more states, I get bunches of regular caches, too. I also notice in this list that several foreign countries are represented. Is the location of these "locationless" caches simply that of the person who logged the find wherever that happens to be ?

January 31, 2005

Locationless caches are about the dumbest cache anyone has ever devised. It makes no sense at all, its like hunting a ghost... Real caches with a log book and geostash is about the best type there is, next a good solid virtual cache depicting something of visual or emotional value. After all its all about the "hunt". I probably would not be interested in a micro, and I consider a locationless cache a non existent cache and won't waste my time on it....

I've enjoyed doing some locationless caches and while I wish geocaching.com would bring them back, I understand their stand that this site is for the traditional listing of caches. That being said your quote is strongly worded with no facts to back it up. Looking at the number of logs on locationless caches, I would say they are quite popular with some geocachers. Edited January 31, 2005 by TahoeJoe

January 31, 2005

Locationless caches really aren't geocaching. That being said, there are enough out there to satisfy those who like them. Here is a complete list. Enjoy!

How is this list gathered ? Whenever I do a pocket query for locationless caches in one or more states, I get bunches of regular caches, too. I also notice in this list that several foreign countries are represented. Is the location of these "locationless" caches simply that of the person who logged the find wherever that happens to be ?

Just discovered that I had not checked an important box on my queries. But in order to get a complete list, don't you have to ControlC every state in the list and then another with every country ?

20.7k · January 31, 2005

You are correct. Two PQs are required.

1.4k · January 31, 2005

Actually you can get them all in ONE pocket query. Just select "States / Provinces" and select them all. Click the first one, scroll down to the bottom, and shift-click the last one.

Since "None" is one of the options in there, you will also get the caches that are not in a real state or province.

24.7k · January 31, 2005

....My personal problem with locationless caches is the original idea of geocaching was to find something using stated or revealed coordinates. Locationless, or more accurately "reverse," caches you don't use a GPS to find an object.

While you can do a bunch of research to complete a locationless, many times you happen across them. So, where's the hunt in that? "Oh, hey, a prymid. Let's take a pic and see if it's already been found."...

CR it's a variation on a larger theme. I've stumbled across caches as well. I don't get the deal with Benchmarks, but others truly enjoy them, and well...they are also a variation on a larger theme.

I think we could debate on what exactly that larger theme is, but for now I think it's enough to admit that geocaching should not be limited to just a box, and that this RASH can grow in directions we don't expect because of whatever that elusive quality is that drew us both to the same hobby, though we clearly have different opinions.

Locationless are not #1 on my list but every now and then I'll do one for kicks.

Edited January 31, 2005 by Renegade Knight

January 31, 2005

Just my 13 cents worth (inflation adjusted)...

I'm new to this and I got real frustrated real fast digging around in the bushes looking for a black film can, or the equivalent. Especially since it's the dead of winter in Indiana.

I really enjoy road trips and seeing the sights, and I know getting there is half the fun (or more). Locationless has given me a great resource for digging into things I am interested in, sights to see, etc. And things that might be interesting to you as well. Like following the orginal path of the Lincoln Highway.

Then I discovered geodashing... Now that is interesting. And in my mind the ultimate recreational use of the GPSr. You have no idea where you are going until you get there.

My idea... everyone just keep doing your own thing, websites will spring up to support you. It is going to be a blast to look back on this in five years and see where we have come from!

Peace!

Fred

January 31, 2005

Actually you can get them all in ONE pocket query. Just select "States / Provinces" and select them all. Click the first one, scroll down to the bottom, and shift-click the last one.

Since "None" is one of the options in there, you will also get the caches that are not in a real state or province.

Cool idea ! Thanks very much.

January 31, 2005

I enjoy the locationless caches and feel they are even more challenging than some of the traditionals. Many of them are well done and they require much more attention than a traditional if they are done correctly. My most rewarding find was a locationless. Merci Boxcar I gained a valuable history lesson in my 3 hour travel from home and since there are 3 of the Merci Boxcars still left to be logged, I am contemplating making a 14 hour trip to Vermont to log the next closest one to me. Of course I would be caching the entire route, but that would be my primary target.

I feel the locationless puts fun into this hobby. I keep my eyes open for something that might fit a locationless topic while travelling and will post it if it's applicable. People will either love or hate em, but I feel they have a place in geocaching.

January 31, 2005

I guess I enjoy the locationless. I waas(sic) driving thru the sticks and came across a cigar store indian and almost put the truck in the ditch trying to turn around (as if it were going somewhere). I'm just not that crazy about the way you have to scan thru all those logs to see if you're first. I know sombody has a link to a site that makes the search quick. Let's see how long it takes for someone to hook us up.

February 1, 2005

People enjoy Geocaching for different reasons. I think most people will agree it can be a valuable family activity. That is why I like locationless caches so much it can bring more of the family into the game. I drive around with my 85 year old Dad searching for locationless caches. He has a list of them that he studies diligently. This is a great activity that we can do together and best of all is the conversation that ensues. All of the different goals open up new topics of conversation for us. Right now the Holy Grail for me is to locate one of the projects that my Dad worked on when he was a teen in the Civilian Conservation Corp. How could it get any better than that? To go on an adventure with my Dad and document some family history at the same time, and let him feel like he is helping me with the game.

It doesn’t take me too long to search through the logs. Once I have them all open I just go to edit and search on this page for some key words like the name of the town, the road or even name of the state.

6.4k · February 1, 2005

Merci Boxcar I gained a valuable history lesson in my 3 hour travel from home and since there are 3 of the Merci Boxcars still left to be logged, I am contemplating making a 14 hour trip to Vermont to log the next closest one to me. Of course I would be caching the entire route, but that would be my primary target.

Wow! You're gonna drive 14hrs to do a cache you can't even log a find on? That's pretty hardcore!

1.6k · February 1, 2005

Locationless caches are about the dumbest cache anyone has ever devised. It makes no sense at all, its like hunting a ghost... Real caches with a log book and geostash is about the best type there is, next a good solid virtual cache depicting something of visual or emotional value. After all its all about the "hunt". I probably would not be interested in a micro, and I consider a locationless cache a non existent cache and won't waste my time on it....

Dale M.

I don't think that they are that dumb. Some of them have pretty cool goals/things to find.

10.1k · February 1, 2005

I've expressed my opinions on Locationless and Virtual caches before. I've been to some lame Virtuals. The major issue seems to be maintenance. Also true of regular caches. But regular caches disappear after a while, if they're not maintained.

I love Locationless Caches. The hunt is the name of the game. Hunting an ammo box is one aspect. Finding a canal lock or an out of place pyramid is another. Benchmarking is another aspect. I enjoy all three.

Some locationless caches are very obtuse. I'll never log a Finnish monastery from the middle ages, or a Quebecois Geodesic Point. Oh, well. How many Duchesney Doughboys are there? But, I have found a carillon, and a Frank Lloyd Wright building! And a Nike base. Didn't stop the car fast enough to log name on a street sign, but we were in a rush that day. I will go back to Princeton to log that sign, when I get a chance. One letter off from my first and last name! Anybody ever seen a street sign with "Jesus" on it? Many of these things are stashed away in my brain. That's geocaching! Stop the car! There's a misspelt sign!

Maintenance seems to the the major problem with Locationless caches, and to a lesser extent Virtuals. If the rules are that only one person can log a lighthouse, then the cache owner needs to enforce the rules. "Sorry, but someone has already logged that suspension bridge/fake tree/flat iron building/whatever." Rules is rules. To my GPS, maintenance is the problem here. They become cheap.

Secondly, it can take quite a time (I'm on dial-up) to load the page of all finds for a Locationless. And if you check out a log or picture, it takes as long to get back to the page. I'm sure that that could be rectified with some effort.

Likewise, there's no map for benchmarks. "Show map of nearby caches" works, but that does not exist for benchmarks.

If one does not care for Locationless caches, that is fine and dandy. Ones does not have to search for them. But I'll brake for a topiary, or butterfly house, if I see one!

2.3k · February 1, 2005

I've expressed my opinions on Locationless and Virtual caches before. I've been to some lame Virtuals. The major issue seems to be maintenance. Also true of regular caches. But regular caches disappear after a while, if they're not maintained.
I love Locationless Caches. The hunt is the name of the game. Hunting an ammo box is one aspect. Finding a canal lock or an out of place pyramid is another. Benchmarking is another aspect. I enjoy all three.

Some locationless caches are very obtuse. I'll never log a Finnish monastery from the middle ages, or a Quebecois Geodesic Point. Oh, well. How many Duchesney Doughboys are there? But, I have found a carillon, and a Frank Lloyd Wright building! And a Nike base. Didn't stop the car fast enough to log name on a street sign, but we were in a rush that day. I will go back to Princeton to log that sign, when I get a chance. One letter off from my first and last name! Anybody ever seen a street sign with "Jesus" on it? Many of these things are stashed away in my brain. That's geocaching! Stop the car! There's a misspelt sign!

Maintenance seems to the the major problem with Locationless caches, and to a lesser extent Virtuals. If the rules are that only one person can log a lighthouse, then the cache owner needs to enforce the rules. "Sorry, but someone has already logged that suspension bridge/fake tree/flat iron building/whatever." Rules is rules. To my GPS, maintenance is the problem here. They become cheap.

Secondly, it can take quite a time (I'm on dial-up) to load the page of all finds for a Locationless. And if you check out a log or picture, it takes as long to get back to the page. I'm sure that that could be rectified with some effort.

Likewise, there's no map for benchmarks. "Show map of nearby caches" works, but that does not exist for benchmarks.

If one does not care for Locationless caches, that is fine and dandy. Ones does not have to search for them. But I'll brake for a topiary, or butterfly house, if I see one!

It's a fact! Great post, Harry.

Believe me, locationless caches take a lot of work. I run the "Dash for Cache" and the "Cigar Store Indian" locationless caches. You've had some good finds for the Dash!

It is a devil to load the entire page of finds on the Dash for Cache. I'm trying to come up with a way to keep a text-only page that lists current finds for a particular target. That way people can click on it and have a reasonably accurate list, without loading all the finds. Cigar Store Indian already has a text list, but it desperately needs updating. Any ideas, anyone?

Benchmarks? Pah. They don't exist! Believe me, I've looked! The only benchmark I've found thus far was eye-level outside my work, circled in orange paint with "BM" painted above it. I've found a dozen others, but later people tell me they aren't benchmarks, but something else. So how many people are jamming metal disks in the ground??? Stop confusing me!

But anyway... my mind is as cluttered as yours with all the locationless finds I am looking for!

February 1, 2005

Merci Boxcar I gained a valuable history lesson in my 3 hour travel from home and since there are 3 of the Merci Boxcars still left to be logged, I am contemplating making a 14 hour trip to Vermont to log the next closest one to me. Of course I would be caching the entire route, but that would be my primary target.

Wow! You're gonna drive 14hrs to do a cache you can't even log a find on? That's pretty hardcore!

The Vermont car is still up for grabs. If the history lesson of it is as interesting as the WV car, I'd nearly walk the miles to it.

I have gained a lot of history lessons on the locationless caches. It's all what you look for with them.

February 1, 2005

terracaching is a geocaching site that has lots of locationless caches.

This site seems to not want to deal with too many of them for whatever reason and that is fine. There are other sites those who wish to place and list such caches can utilize.

6.4k · February 1, 2005

Merci Boxcar I gained a valuable history lesson in my 3 hour travel from home and since there are 3 of the Merci Boxcars still left to be logged, I am contemplating making a 14 hour trip to Vermont to log the next closest one to me. Of course I would be caching the entire route, but that would be my primary target.

Wow! You're gonna drive 14hrs to do a cache you can't even log a find on? That's pretty hardcore!

The Vermont car is still up for grabs. If the history lesson of it is as interesting as the WV car, I'd nearly walk the miles to it.

I have gained a lot of history lessons on the locationless caches. It's all what you look for with them.

It's still up for grabs, but not by you. From the cache page:

You must take the photo for this cache - old vacation photos and photos downloaded from the web don't count. You may only log this cache once, and can't log a boxcar that's already been logged. Once all remaining boxcars have been logged we will archive this cache.

Most locationless caches include this restriction. Say what you want about cheating on normal caches, but cheating on locationless caches often deprives another cacher from logging a find.

Locationless Caches

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

Join the conversation