Dpm?

[WH]

Now, look at your answers. I'm betting it's not a lightpole in a walmart, or a dumpster behind the quick-mart.

 

No you are correct .

 

But then I would also not be opposed of telling them or showing them the Difference between them either . At least they would get a feel for the diversity of all the different types of caches that may be available to them . At the same time teaching them that its ok to find enjoyment in all types of caches.

 

I have my favorites , I have the forsight to teach others on how to place well thought out caches that people will enjoy . For the record if you choose to have a look see at our profile you will see that we have not placed any of the so called "lame" walmart lightpole caches.

 

I just do not have this great need to ruin what is fun for others, or to force feed my views and opinions upon them .

 

Star

Ditto the sentiment.

 

I have only 7 active caches because I choose try to put some thought and creativity into them. Whether I have suceeded or not is a matter of personal taste, but the effort has been put in none the less. There are TONS of malls, Walmarts and other similar parking areas around that I could fill up with micros, but I choose not too.

 

I will, however, defend anyone else's right to put caches there. Who am I to dictate to another where they do and do not hide caches.

 

Let people play their own game they way they see fit. Don't presume to dictate what is and is not lame.

 

One person's trash is another one's treasure.

[+Mopar]

Fine then why dont you go place the type of cache you want while the rest of us place the type of cache we want.

 

Cache and let cache.

Does anyone really WANT to find 100 film canisters in lightpoles? Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster?

 

I suspect most people who claim to enjoy those types of caches REALLY enjoy either the social aspect of doing them "wagon train" style, or they enjoy increasing their smiley count (or both).

In either case, it's got nothing to do with the cache itself.

 

I think everyone here can agree easy to find does NOT have equal lame.

Easy to access does NOT have to equal lame.

Hard to find or access does not automatically equal great either.

 

It IS possible to hide high-quality urban micros; just ask the Thousand Oaks, CA area cachers! When we were caching out there last month, one micro after another had me going "WOW, what a great cache!" (when I finally found them, hehehe!)

Edited February 24, 2005 by Mopar

[WH]

Does anyone really WANT to find 100 film canisters in lightpoles? Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster?

 

If you don't, just utilize that nice new feature called an ignore list and move on to caches that are more to your liking.

[+briansnat]

Does anyone really WANT to find 100 film canisters in lightpoles? Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster?

 

Apparently they do.

[+Team Tigger International]

Does anyone really WANT to find 100 film canisters in lightpoles? Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster?

 

To your first question , I would have to say yes ... sorry but there are those that quite enjoy a "numbers" run ( we have never done this ) but its the way they want to play.

 

To the second question , If I found a moldy plup for a log I would be kind enough to e-mail the placer telling him politely of the condition of his cache in the hopes that they would go out and correct it.

[+Mopar]

Does anyone really WANT to find 100 film canisters in lightpoles? Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster?

 

If you don't, just utilize that nice new feature called an ignore list and move on to caches that are more to your liking.

That didn't answer my question.

 

PS: Until Jeremy gives us cache attributes for "owner has no intention of maintaining" and "less then 20ft from parking" and "owner spent 5 minutes or less creating this cache" AND the owners use them AND we can filter them out of PQs; the ignore list is not an answer. Especially when traveling. In my local area I might be able to decide after finding a few of one person's hides that I probably won't like the rest, but when traveling to a new area, I have no idea. When you go to an area 2000 miles from home that has 1000 caches within 10 miles of your hotel, how do you find the ones you want to do? I'm not gonna rule out all micros, since I've found plenty of amazing ones. I'm not going to filter out 1 star terrain, because easy access doesn't equal lame either.

I'm not even going to rule out the ones with lame cache descriptions, because the cache page has nothing to do with the cache itself.

 

So how does one ignore the lame caches before actually doing them?

[+Jamie Z]

Does anyone really WANT to find 100 film canisters in lightpoles? Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster?

I'm with Brian on this one. Mopar, I agree with your thoughts on this subject, but experience has shown that these so-called lame caches are quite popular.

 

Why? I have no idea. Like WH, I have only a couple of hides, because that's as many really cool places I've found. I would never consider hiding a lamp pole cache in a parking lot because I can't imagine wanting to add more junk to this hobby.

 

Yet, people hide them every day, and many other people find those things over and over.

 

It doesn't make sense to me--tossing a key holder at a street sign, or under a phone booth at a gas station--but a lot of geocachers like to play that way.

 

Jamie

[+briansnat]

If you don't, just utilize that nice new feature called an ignore list and move on to caches that are more to your liking.

 

OK deal. Now please explain to me how I'm going to know I want to add the cache to my ignore list without first wasting the time and gas going there.

Edited February 24, 2005 by briansnat

[+Mopar]

Does anyone really WANT to find 100 film canisters in lightpoles? Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster?

 

To your first question , I would have to say yes ... sorry but there are those that quite enjoy a "numbers" run ( we have never done this ) but its the way they want to play.

 

I see you didn't finish reading.

I suspect most people who claim to enjoy those types of caches REALLY enjoy either the social aspect of doing them "wagon train" style, or they enjoy increasing their smiley count (or both).

In either case, it's got nothing to do with the cache itself.

 

The people that enjoy a numbers run (and I know enough of them to back this up, I've even been known to knock off some 40-50 cache runs myself) enjoy the RUN itself. They enjoy the planning, the routing, the racing, and yes, the smileys. They don't per se "enjoy" the lame caches. They are enjoying the numbers run, not the caches. They don't WANT lame caches, they want easy to get to, easy to find caches. That does not HAVE to equal "lame" or poorly maintained.

[+Team Tigger International]

So how does one ignore the lame caches before actually doing them?

 

Brain power ? Common sense ? Reading the logs instead of just the Cache page ?

*shrugs* just a thought or two that seems to work for us .

 

Sure every now and again one that we would choose not to hunt may slip thru but then when we get to the area we can pretty much tell if it is going to be to our personal liking or not .

 

I do not beleive there is an easy answer to your question as what , you dislike the next person my enjoy . Is that not possible ?

 

Star

[+Mopar]

Does anyone really WANT to find 100 film canisters in lightpoles? Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster?

I'm with Brian on this one. Mopar, I agree with your thoughts on this subject, but experience has shown that these so-called lame caches are quite popular.

 

Why? I have no idea. Like WH, I have only a couple of hides, because that's as many really cool places I've found. I would never consider hiding a lamp pole cache in a parking lot because I can't imagine wanting to add more junk to this hobby.

 

Yet, people hide them every day, and many other people find those things over and over.

 

It doesn't make sense to me--tossing a key holder at a street sign, or under a phone booth at a gas station--but a lot of geocachers like to play that way.

 

Jamie

I suspect most people who claim to enjoy those types of caches REALLY enjoy either the social aspect of doing them "wagon train" style, or they enjoy increasing their smiley count (or both).

In either case, it's got nothing to do with the cache itself.

[+Team Tigger International]

I suspect most people who claim to enjoy those types of caches REALLY enjoy either the social aspect of doing them "wagon train" style, or they enjoy increasing their smiley count (or both).

 

So because thats the way they chose to play ... It is Wrong ?

[WH]

I know a few people who enjoy caching but are limited to public transportation.

 

If it werent for these lampost micros, Wally World parking lots, dumpster behind the seven-eleven or other "so called" lame caches, there would be darn few (if any) caches for them to find.

[umc]

This is awesome, I'm getting a ton of new ideas for cache hides, keep them coming.

[+briansnat]

I suspect most people who claim to enjoy those types of caches REALLY enjoy either the social aspect of doing them "wagon train" style, or they enjoy increasing their smiley count (or both).

 

So because thats the way they chose to play ... It is Wrong ?

You missed the rest of his post:

 

They don't WANT lame caches, they want easy to get to, easy to find caches. That does not HAVE to equal "lame" or poorly maintained.

[+Mopar]

I know a few people who enjoy caching but are limited to public transportation.

 

If it werent for these lampost micros, Wally World parking lots, dumpster behind the seven-eleven or other "so called" lame caches, there would be darn few (if any) caches for them to find.

OH man, THAT is so far off the mark, it's not even funny.

My only other comment is to point to this cacher. Read his logs and the caches he's done and then come back and tell us again people who use public transportation are limited to "lampost micros, Wally World parking lots, dumpster behind the seven-eleven or other "so called" lame caches".

[+Team Tigger International]

I suspect most people who claim to enjoy those types of caches REALLY enjoy either the social aspect of doing them "wagon train" style, or they enjoy increasing their smiley count (or both).

 

So because thats the way they chose to play ... It is Wrong ?

You missed the rest of his post:

 

They don't WANT lame caches, they want easy to get to, easy to find caches. That does not HAVE to equal "lame" or poorly maintained.

No actually Brian , I did not miss the rest of his post , he was refering in particular to numbers runners that he personally knows .. not everyone .

[+briansnat]

I know a few people who enjoy caching but are limited to public transportation.

 

If it werent for these lampost micros, Wally World parking lots, dumpster behind the seven-eleven or other "so called" lame caches, there would be darn few (if any) caches for them to find.

OH man, THAT is so far off the mark, it's not even funny.

My only other comment is to point to this cacher. Read his logs and the caches he's done and then come back and tell us again people who use public transportation are limited to "lampost micros, Wally World parking lots, dumpster behind the seven-eleven or other "so called" lame caches".

This log is a good example.

 

Here is another

 

He used public transportation and some foot power to bring him here and to at least a hundred other similar caches.

Edited February 24, 2005 by briansnat

[+Muddler]

I am relatively new to geocaching and after reading a number of the replies in this thread I have a couple of comments. First, don't take to heart what only one of the finders have said about your cache, if the majority liked it then your efforts were worth it. Second, there are always going to be folks that for some reason were disappointed in the cache. Either it was two hard to find, to easy to find, they didn't like the location or the swag in the cache did not meet their expectations.

 

I try to be particular in my review of the information on the cache page. I want to know what others have said, the area where the cache is located and maybe what I can expect to find in the cache. But mostly I form my opinion from what the majority say, but do keep in mind the statements that seem out of place with the majority. I don't really care about finding really cool booty in the cache, I do however try leave something if I can and always trade up when I do.

 

If someone took the time to make the hide, I feel that I should be in the spirit of “it is better to give then receive”. I have not yet hidden a cache, but I am planning to hide one soon. I am sure there will be some that will not like it, but I believe the majority will.

 

I guess we could use an informal rating system “Finder's Review or Rating” where we could give STARS for overall quality of the cache. But you know there would be people that would question the opinions of others in rating each cache.

 

Again, look at the overall comments by all the finders of the cache. If they are predominantly negative, either make changes to the cache, archive the cache and do better on the next hide you make.

 

If you are to sensitive to the opinions of others you may be better off not hiding a cache where you will have look at the reviews of anyone who cares to give you their opinion about what you have done.

 

Good luck in the future and take something away form the experience, both the good and the bad.

 

Muddler

[+fishingfools]

This is awesome, I'm getting a ton of new ideas for cache hides, keep them coming.

Brilliant! JUst laughed coffee on my keyboard

[+RuffRidr]

That didn't answer my question.

 

PS: Until Jeremy gives us cache attributes for "owner has no intention of maintaining" and "less then 20ft from parking" and "owner spent 5 minutes or less creating this cache" AND the owners use them AND we can filter them out of PQs; the ignore list is not an answer. Especially when traveling. In my local area I might be able to decide after finding a few of one person's hides that I probably won't like the rest, but when traveling to a new area, I have no idea. When you go to an area 2000 miles from home that has 1000 caches within 10 miles of your hotel, how do you find the ones you want to do? I'm not gonna rule out all micros, since I've found plenty of amazing ones. I'm not going to filter out 1 star terrain, because easy access doesn't equal lame either.

I'm not even going to rule out the ones with lame cache descriptions, because the cache page has nothing to do with the cache itself.

 

So how does one ignore the lame caches before actually doing them?

Amen! I'm sick of the "use the ignore feature" arguement. In a ton of cases, it is just not feasible. When out of your home area, you're not going to know a cache is going to suck, until after you have found it.

 

--RuffRidr

[WH]

Everyone has different ideas of what makes a cache either good or lousy. As for me, the only lousy cache is the one I cant find.

 

Briansnat is correct. There is no really good way to tell whether a cache is good or not unless you go there, but even if you think the cache is spectacular, sooner or later somone will find fault with it. You just cant please everyone.

 

Ive had both good and bad reviews of all my caches but Im not going to run out and archive them because someone didnt like it for one reason or another.

[+briansnat]

Briansnat is correct. There is no really good way to tell whether a cache is good or not unless you go there, but even if you think the cache is spectacular, sooner or later somone will find fault with it. You just cant please everyone.

 

I disagree. I've seen many a cache that has no critical logs whatsoever and some caches that every log absolutely gushes over.

Edited February 24, 2005 by briansnat

[+Mr.Benchmark]

I suspect most people who claim to enjoy those types of caches REALLY enjoy either the social aspect of doing them "wagon train" style, or they enjoy increasing their smiley count (or both).

 

So because thats the way they chose to play ... It is Wrong ?

No, it's not wrong. There's nothing wrong with people playing this way. I think his point is that they can hide easy to find caches in pleasant places with just slightly more work on the part of the hider.

 

I don't enjoy this style of play, though - not even a little bit. But in my area it's pretty much drowned out more traditional types of caching. So if I ignore all the ones I don't like, I find I'm ignoring pretty much everything that's been newly placed. I don't want to try to stop anyone else from playing the way they want to play. I'd just like to have a way to play the game I like.

[+briansnat]

No, it's not wrong. There's nothing wrong with people playing this way. I think his point is that they can hide easy to find caches in pleasant places with just slightly more work on the part of the hider.

 

 

This is a key point that some people seem to be missing. Micros aren't the issue. Easy caches aren't the issue. Urban caches aren't the issue. Its unmantained caches in unappealing or just plain disgusting areas that are the issue.

 

Or are there people who actually enjoy finding slimy log books, hidden in leaky canisters in feces and trash strewn lots, next to dumpsters and under bridges littered with hypodermic needles, empty wine bottles and discarded condoms. Be honest you numbers hounds, do you really LIKE these caches,or everything else being equal would you prefer that the cache be in a pleasant or interesting area? I find it hard to believe that a segment of the population here honestly believes that caches hidden in these repulsive areas are the cat's pajamas, but if you do, say so and I'll eat a large helping of eggplant.

Edited February 24, 2005 by briansnat

[+Mopar]

[+Runaround]

Where did all the "every cache is a good cache" types suddenly go????

[+briansnat]

Where did all the "every cache is a good cache" types suddenly go????

To the town dump to get FTF on the micro that popped up in the tire pile.

[+fly46]

Where did all the "every cache is a good cache" types suddenly go????

Sorry.. Didn't know I needed permission to go to bed.

 

I'm sick of the "use the ignore feature" arguement

Cool. We have a brand new feature and it's already pissing people off!

 

 

As for really LIKING micros - I do.

I live with a non-cacher. I don't always get to go out and cache with groups of people. So when I'm out with said non-cacher, it's nice that I get the opportunity to grab a quick one on the way home from grocery shopping or a trip to the mall or whatever. Went to lunch one day with my mother and got to grab a quick one because it was at Jack In The Box.

 

Doing one here or one there obviously isn't for friendship on a cache run.

[+briansnat]

As for really LIKING micros - I do.

 

OK, I'll say it again. Micros aren't the issue. Easy caches aren't the issue. Urban caches aren't the issue. Its unmantained caches in unappealing or just plain disgusting areas that are the issue.

[+j9cache & Mike(j9+M)]

This is just incredible. All the elitists, beating their dead horses. There is a need for all kinds of caches, even the Wally World types, that someone's going to want to seek. When the weather is nicer, and I my husband is available to go with me, I too might be out seeking some of the caches that make the earth move for you. But for now, its nice to have some I can just bop over to, with no expectations of a life changing experience, just an outing. The hiders with the moldy logs are not reading this board, they haven't been on the site since they hid their last cache. Which brings me to restate what I said on page 2, I think. There's no reason to be rude. Markwell, you asked how to state it, why does it need to be stated? Just as in any social situation, why would I need to insult this accomplishment, small that it may be, any more that I might feel the need to insult any other accomplishment one may have made. If I go to your house and I don't like it, do I need to tell you you have any ugly house? I'm so tired of this thread but I can't leave it alone because I keep looking for someone who 'gets it'. There's no need to be mean. This is a game. Just respond "TNLNSL", and go on to the next one.

[+nfa]

OK, I'll say it again.  Micros aren't the issue. Easy caches aren't the issue. Urban caches aren't the issue. Its unmantained caches in unappealing or just plain disgusting areas that are the issue.

Has anybody been disagreeing with you about unmantained caches in unappealing or just plain disgusting areas???

 

Is the cache the OP was talking about unmaintained or in a disgusting area, I don't think so, just in a spot that some (lots of) people don't like for caching.

 

nfa-jamie

Edited February 24, 2005 by NFA

[+briansnat]

OK, I'll say it again.  Micros aren't the issue. Easy caches aren't the issue. Urban caches aren't the issue. Its unmantained caches in unappealing or just plain disgusting areas that are the issue.

Has anybody been disagreeing with you about unmantained caches in unappealing or just plain disgusting areas???

 

nfa-jamie

Yes. That is the entire gist of the argument over the last few pages. The "all caches are good caches to someone" crowd, vs. the "we can do better" crowd.

Edited February 24, 2005 by briansnat

[+SeventhSon]

Where did all the "every cache is a good cache" types suddenly go????

"I'm still here chief"

 

I can only say "I like 'em all" in so many way I'm not gonna change the mind of someone who feels there are bad caches any sooner than they are gonna change my mind.

 

Since this thread started out about a log and turned into a cache bash, and spawned a couple other "lame" threads, I'll say this ...

 

I was searching for a cache early one morning. Walking up the trail hearing the twigs crunch beneath my steps. Off to the right, a couple hundred yards, was a herd of buffaloes. Steam was rising from within as their breath clouds plumed. To the left, down in the valley, some wild mustangs were prancing around near a lake that seemed to be covered in glass. Ahead of me, the sun was just coming over the mountain top. The sky was a color not yet depicted on any canvas. And me? I'm watching a monochrome arrow on a little GPS trying to find tupperware. I'm missing all of nature's beauty because I'm here for the cache. I'll sign the log "Thanks for the cache" which is short for .. "Thanks for placing this container and giving me the opportunity to come hunt it because that's why I do this. I like the hunt. I missed the buffaloes and mustangs and the sky that was colored like no crayon in the big box."

 

Sometimes, it's just about the hunt

[+nfa]

who's been arguing for unmaintained caches in disgusting places filled with feces and dirty needles...

[+JohnnyVegas]

I know a few people who enjoy caching but are limited to public transportation.

 

If it werent for these lampost micros, Wally World parking lots, dumpster behind the seven-eleven or other "so called" lame caches, there would be darn few (if any) caches for them to find.

OH man, THAT is so far off the mark, it's not even funny.

My only other comment is to point to this cacher. Read his logs and the caches he's done and then come back and tell us again people who use public transportation are limited to "lampost micros, Wally World parking lots, dumpster behind the seven-eleven or other "so called" lame caches".

This log is a good example.

 

Here is another

 

He used public transportation and some foot power to bring him here and to at least a hundred other similar caches.

While there are areas in which public transit can get someone to a good cache location, there are also areas were public transit is not very good or may not me an option.

 

There are people who use public transit that have mobility problems, they could be in a wheel chair or on crutches or may have other problems, I know one cacher in my area that was injured on a Mt. Bike and can now only walk a few hundred feet at best. Posting a picture of a cacher that made it to the top of peak by using public transit to get to a trail head is not relevant to those who cannot do such a cache. Lets face it, there are people who can only do urban caches.

[+briansnat]

who's been arguing for unmaintained caches in disgusting places filled with feces and dirty needles...

I can only say "I like 'em all" in so many way

 

There is a need for all kinds of caches

 

Let people play their own game they way they see fit. Don't presume to dictate what is and is not lame.

 

One person's trash is another one's treasure.

 

"Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster? "

 

To your first question , I would have to say yes ... sorry but there are those that quite enjoy a "numbers" run ( we have never done this ) but its the way they want to play.

 

Everyone has different ideas of what makes a cache either good or lousy. As for me, the only lousy cache is the one I cant find.

 

There is a need for all kinds of caches

 

Some of these were responses to posts where Mopar and I were saying little more than "we can do better and "why place caches in unappealing, or disgusting areas?" I have to think they were supporting them.

[+briansnat]

While there are areas in which public transit can get someone to a good cache location, there are also areas were public transit is not very good or may not me an option.

 

You're not going to find a worse public transit system than the one in NJ that his guy mastered.

 

here are people who use public transit that have mobility problems, they could be in a wheel chair or on crutches or may have other problems, I know one cacher in my area that was injured on a Mt. Bike and can now only walk a few hundred feet at best. Posting a picture of a cacher that made it to the top of peak by using public transit to get to a trail head is not relevant to those who cannot do such a cache. Lets face it, there are people who can only do urban caches.

 

How many times do we have to say it? Its NOT urban caches that are the issue. Its NOT micro caches that are the issue. Its NOT easy caches that are the issue. Its lack of effort and imagination on the part of the cache owner that is the problem.

There are many great urban caches out there, thousands of excellent micros and an equal number of easy caches that are fantastic. Their existence is proof that there is no need to place caches in unappealing and/or disgusting areas.

 

I also reject the notion that people with mobility problems are to be limited to finding lousy caches. They deserve as good a geocaching experience as those of us witout mobility problems. It's patronizing for you to sit behind your keyboard and sentence them to a lifetime of Walmart parking lot caches. We can do better.

Edited February 24, 2005 by briansnat

[+nfa]

Briansnat,

 

Looking at the quote you presented it (cut in a way that distorts the intent of team tigger in their earlier post) and the actual quote dilutes your argument a bit.

 

"Tweaked Quote"

"Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster? "

 

To your first question , I would have to say yes ... sorry but there are those that quite enjoy a "numbers" run ( we have never done this ) but its the way they want to play.

 

Actual Quote

Does anyone really WANT to find 100 film canisters in lightpoles? Does anyone REALLY want to find a hide-a-key full of moldy pulp attached to a dumpster?

 

To your first question , I would have to say yes ... sorry but there are those that quite enjoy a "numbers" run ( we have never done this ) but its the way they want to play.

 

Nobody is arguing in favor of unmaintained caches in disgusting places covered with feces and dirty needles...they are arguing for diversity (which I think you are too, which begs the question why are you arguing with people who seemingly agree with you?).

 

nfa-jamie

[+briansnat]

Nobody is arguing in favor of unmaintained caches in disgusting places covered with feces and dirty needles...they are arguing for diversity (which I think you are too, which begs the question why are you arguing with people who seemingly agree with you?).

 

I've been arguing against caches in unappealing and disgusting areas and that we should be able to do better. They are countering that there is a need for ALL kinds of caches. How do you see that as agreement?

Edited February 24, 2005 by briansnat

[+Clan X-Man]

I live with a non-cacher.

That's a whole 'nother support group er, forum.

[+Mopar]

While there are areas in which public transit can get someone to a good cache location, there are also areas were public transit is not very good or may not me an option.

 

There are people who use public transit that have mobility problems, they could be in a wheel chair or on crutches or may have other problems, I know one cacher in my area that was injured on a Mt. Bike and can now only walk a few hundred feet at best. Posting a picture of a cacher that made it to the top of peak by using public transit to get to a trail head is not relevant to those who cannot do such a cache. Lets face it, there are people who can only do urban caches.

You're getting downright insulting. NJ has probably the WORST public transportation in the nation. He takes it as far as it goes, then hikes, bikes, or paddles the rest.

 

I also notice the people who claim we need these caches for handicapped people are never actually handicapped.

 

Would someone like to please tell the amazing Mosaica she can only find caches in parking lot light poles from now on?

 

Would someone like to tell the lovely Pyewacket to stop hiding terrain 2.5 and 3.5 caches, and start sticking hide-a-keys on dumpsters instead?

 

Please, someone tell TAR he CANT climb a mountain and must only log drive-by virtuals from now on.

 

How can you insult cachers like these (and many more) by saying the only caches they can do are in Walmart parking lots?

[+sbell111]

I think that there is a need for all types of caches, except caches in disgusting areas unless the cache in the disgusting area is an attempt to solicite help in cleaning up said area.

[+wimseyguy]

No, it's not wrong. There's nothing wrong with people playing this way. I think his point is that they can hide easy to find caches in pleasant places with just slightly more work on the part of the hider.

 

 

This is a key point that some people seem to be missing. Micros aren't the issue. Easy caches aren't the issue. Urban caches aren't the issue. Its unmantained caches in unappealing or just plain disgusting areas that are the issue.

 

Or are there people who actually enjoy finding slimy log books, hidden in leaky canisters in feces and trash strewn lots, next to dumpsters and under bridges littered with hypodermic needles, empty wine bottles and discarded condoms. Be honest you numbers hounds, do you really LIKE these caches,or everything else being equal would you prefer that the cache be in a pleasant or interesting area? I find it hard to believe that a segment of the population here honestly believes that caches hidden in these repulsive areas are the cat's pajamas, but if you do, say so and I'll eat a large helping of eggplant.

I volunteer to be to the chef at this meal if it ever takes place.

 

I don't recall anyone specifically endorsing the soggy log, hypo strewn, trash pile, pile o'doot hides. The position I take, and I've seen in most of the logs you quoted later on in the thread, is that there is a place for the occasional guard rail park and grab, be it at a scenic vista, or a Wal-Mart parking lot. These hide are not taking over the landscape around here. Why is my home so different than everyone elses? My first page with 9.5 miles radius is showing 6 new hides (not including an event, and a special 1K challange hunt). None of these appear to be anything like a parking lot lightpole hide. I know two of the hiders, and they wouldn't go there. The third is new, but when I zoom the map in, I'm pretty sure it isn't either.

 

BTW the particular hide that the OP referenced was in a very clean parking lot. Am I the only one here that actualy found that cache?

PS I had a much nicer experience at this cache than at one of Brian's on last year's Northern pilgrimage. (Might have had something to do with the weather and snowpack though. )

PPS webfooting upwards through the posts made since I got busy with lunch had me really puzzled over Mopar's kitty cheesecake pic for a minute.

[+Mr.Benchmark]

How can you insult cachers like these (and many more) by saying the only caches they can do are in Walmart parking lots?

Very well put, Mopar! I pointed out in the other thread that this is just rationalization. People who place these caches have ZERO interest in the disabled for the most part. As best I can tell, they are playing a different game, one that involves finding stuff as fast as possible. That's just fine - they are certainly entitled to play as they like. But how DARE they try to rationalize this by saying they are "hiding it for the handicapped!"

[+Mr.Benchmark]

These hide are not taking over the landscape around here. Why is my home so different than everyone elses? My first page with 9.5 miles radius is showing 6 new hides (not including an event, and a special 1K challange hunt). None of these appear to be anything like a parking lot lightpole hide. I know two of the hiders, and they wouldn't go there. The third is new, but when I zoom the map in, I'm pretty sure it isn't either.

You are fortunate then. I didn't think it would happen here, either, but it has. Good luck.

[+nfa]

silly discussion...

Edited February 24, 2005 by NFA

[+fly46]

How can you insult cachers like these (and many more) by saying the only caches they can do are in Walmart parking lots?

 

At the same token, Kiawa can do multiple mile hikes some days and other days can barely do a light pole.

 

Today I couldn’t walk. Sure, I could hobble a short distance or briefly stand, but there was no way I could go Geocaching on such a beautiful day… Or was there?

Due to being stricken with Fibromyalgia and severe plantar fasciitis, I am often very limited to what I can do. Geocaching has become my favorite hobby because it has the flexibility to be done at any time on any terrain. Though my feet were far too injured to walk any great length, there was one cache in the area I knew I could do: The Presque Isle Lagoon cache.

 

My husband is not at all into Geocaching, but he’s always happy to go out with me because we can finally do some outdoors activities together. We rented a canoe and set off to find the elusive watercraft-only cache. Almost two hours later, we found the cache dry, well-hidden, and teeming with goodies. I took a rock from Arizona and left some trinkets, including two travel bugs. The sunburn was worth it!

 

I feel fortunate to have found this sport, game, and hobby. Geocaching offers itself to everyone and makes no judgments on race, gender, religion, age, health, social status, etc. It is the perfect game for those casually seeking "something to do" all the way to extreme competitive outdoor sportsmen. If it weren’t for Geocaching, I would still be sitting inside cursing my health problems and struggling to keep fit. However, now I am free to walk, drive, bike, rollerblade, hike, paddle, and even crawl to the nearest cache, whether it is on a sidewalk, in a lake, or on top of a mountain. No matter how good or bad I am feeling, there is always another cache I can find. Thank you, Geocachers!

 

So don't say that just because some people will do that that everybody can.

[+Mastifflover]

Nobody is arguing in favor of unmaintained caches in disgusting places covered with feces and dirty needles...they are arguing for diversity (which I think you are too, which begs the question why are you arguing with people who seemingly agree with you?).

 

I've been arguing against caches in unappealing and disgusting areas and that we should be able to do better. They are countering that there is a need for ALL kinds of caches. How do you see that as agreement?

Brian I think that is a different argument than CR is promoting. My wife has a Walmart light pole cache that has always gotten good reviews. It has never had a wet log and she usually checks it after each time someone finds it to make sure that the lid is on tight and the paper didn't get wet or dirty. I think that makes it a good cache. But because CR doesn't like this style of cache he would automatically proclaim it to be lame.

[CoyoteRed]

But because CR doesn't like this style of cache he would automatically proclaim it to be lame.

Actually, no. I know I pick on Wal-mart lamppost micros, but it goes well beyond that.

 

Please see my previous post in this thread about it.

 

(Really, I shouldn't pick on Wal-mart parking lot caches as Sissy has an idea for one. Let me tell you though, I doubt you'll see one like this elsewhere. There is a unique feature to it.)