Micro Angst

24.7k · March 1, 2005

If we gave them their own catagory, and lowered the 528' rule for OTHER caches placed near a micro to 100' would that help?

Or maybe micro's can only be placed within a towns city limits?

4.7k · March 1, 2005

i recently went to a park with some lovely caches: 2 challenging micros, 2 challenging multis, and an easy standard cache. a little sump'n fer everyone.

i've seen micros that are WAY better 'n an ammo can for the place. why decree that one person's kind of cache isn't as good as another's?

oh wait... i think i sense that somebody's name is about to become a verb...

4.8k · March 1, 2005

There will always be angst. Tinkering with the rules is unlikely to solve it. It would likely just create new angst. Angst is part of life. It is also what you make of it. Angst is as angst does.......

9.2k · March 1, 2005

Wow, Carleen's post had 39 words in it, and five of them were "angst," resulting in an Angst Meter Score of 0.12820512820512820512820512820513. That is truly impressive work.

1.3k · March 1, 2005

Wow, Carleen's post had 39 words in it, and five of them were "angst," resulting in an Angst Meter Score of 0.12820512820512820512820512820513. That is truly impressive work.

7.3k · March 1, 2005

No angst here, micro or otherwise. Angst meter score the big ZED

1.8k · March 1, 2005

Sorry, I'm with Isonzo Karst on this one. I feel no a...ang...ack, I can't even say that blasted word!

2.6k · March 1, 2005

ZED

Do all Floradidians talk funny like Euros?

March 1, 2005

Wow, Carleen's post had 39 words in it, and five of them were "angst," resulting in an Angst Meter Score of 0.12820512820512820512820512820513. That is truly impressive work.

Do Angst Meters measure in angstroms?

18.9k · March 1, 2005

As way too many threads have noted in the past few weeks, micros (lame or otherwise) have become all too common in this game. I defintely perfer regular size with trade items and room for TBs but micros are all too easy to hide for many (insert reasons here).

I like Renegade's concept but even I see how it will result in much angst (nice post carleen).

6.5k · March 1, 2005

Am I in the correct thread? I only have 2 microns of angst. :huh:

Otherwise I am perfectly happy with the way I am playing this silly game. :lol:

Was that too harsh?

2k · March 1, 2005

.....
Or maybe micro's can only be placed within a towns city limits?

So that would narrow it down to like 100 square miles of undeveloped open desert that the City of Reno has annexed. I don't even want to think how much open desert is inside the Las Vegas city limits.

7.2k · March 1, 2005

If we gave them their own catagory, and lowered the 528' rule for OTHER caches placed near a micro to 100' would that help?

Or maybe micro's can only be placed within a towns city limits?

I don't think micros are the issue.

I think issue is more attitude than anything else. It's almost like the problem with trading. Why do we admonish folks to trade up? We have the "Trade up, trade even, or don't trade" mantra. I prefer the "Trade kindly" one myself, but I'm biased. I feel the reason is so your fellow cacher can enjoy the cache as much as you did. It's a feeling of wanting others to enjoy the game.

But, there seems to be a segment of the geocaching population that only think about numbers. I've seen from more than one person and on more than one occasion that every cache is a "gift." "A gift of what," you ask? A smilie.

Now, I know many people like to look at their numbers and some are motivated by them and that's perfectly alright. But when "the numbers" become so important that everything else is pushed aside it hurts the game.

All of my fussing and fighting here on the forums about lame, junk caches is because I see a trend that some only see "the numbers" and don't really care about the person who might not care about their numbers. What's in it for them? In many cases, nothing. Where's the same feeling of "trade up" in that hide? You can't easily filter on "this cache is for numbers hounds only." There's no filter for "nothing here but a smilie."

My point is you can hide a cache that is for a numbers hound and for someone that isn't. It doesn't have to be either or.

...and it certainly isn't just that it is a micro.

1.5k · March 1, 2005

Solution = STFU.

Simple, right?

7.3k · March 1, 2005

There are some local cachers that always call me the queen of micros. I really like regular caches, so I've always wondered what their problem was.

But then I looked at what caches I own. Out of 15 active "traditional" caches, 8 of them are micros. :lol:

They just kinda sneak up on you when you are focusing on in town placements, especially when you can't travel a lot, or it's in the middle of winter. :huh:

March 1, 2005

If we gave them their own catagory, and lowered the 528' rule for OTHER caches placed near a micro to 100' would that help?

That is a good idea. How about a different category for "quick to find" caches as opposed to just "micros" as a solution. Regardless of the container, if the distance from the car to the cache is less than 250', or you expect the finder to take 10 minutes or less, then it falls into the "quick find" category. You can have a quick to find ammocan - it just takes the right placement! I guess it doesn't solve the problem of a micro in the woods, but I don't think there's an overabundance of those. I don't see the need to limit micros to the city limits. There are probably folks out in the country surrounded by long hikes to an ammocan that might appreciate a nice quick cache.

This would really resolve a great many of my complaints. I could easily filter out caches that I'm just not interested in.

There needn't be any stigma in placing or finding that type of cache. I'm perfectly happy for people who just want to log a find to be able to do it however they like best. I just don't want it to get in the way of what I like to do, and this seems like it would really help with the situation.

6.5k · March 1, 2005

That is a good idea. How about a different category for "quick to find" caches as opposed to just "micros" as a solution. Regardless of the container, if the distance from the car to the cache is less than 250', or you expect the finder to take 10 minutes or less, then it falls into the "quick find" category

The new cache attribute with the clock face is just what you are asking for. Granted it's a hour or less, not ten minutes, but some of us are just quicker than other perhaps.

I understand some day in the not to distant future these attributes will actually work with the PQ's as well. Won't that be swell?

March 2, 2005

That is a good idea. How about a different category for "quick to find" caches as opposed to just "micros" as a solution. Regardless of the container, if the distance from the car to the cache is less than 250', or you expect the finder to take 10 minutes or less, then it falls into the "quick find" category

The new cache attribute with the clock face is just what you are asking for. Granted it's a hour or less, not ten minutes, but some of us are just quicker than other perhaps.

I understand some day in the not to distant future these attributes will actually work with the PQ's as well. Won't that be swell?

An hour isn't really fine enough granularity. It's really the distance + the time that I'm more concerned about. Actually a field that could be filtered for the PQ for distance to the cache would suit me about as well. I'd filter out everything less than 450' from parking to the cache, regardless of what it was. I know I come off as being really adamant about this stuff - but I don't mind doing a "quick cache", where "quick" is a 0.5 mile roundtrip walk. You can do most like this in less than an hour. I just don't usually want to do 10 quick caches with a 20' walk from parking to the cache...

1.5k · March 2, 2005

I'm glad I don't live in an area with the kind of insane cache density where I have to worry about the 528 foot rule.

March 2, 2005

The issue of micros and the .1 rule seem like a strange mix. Tracy and I have been places with high cache densities and guess what, not a single micro was among the grouped caches we found.

I agree with Carleen that mesing with the existing rule can only lead to more problems.

1.3k · March 2, 2005

Good post CR. It has given me some insight into your message. I'm sure it's been there all along though. I'm all for encouraging people to place quality caches. The tone of some of your posts sometimes causes that message to be lost. (On me, anyway) There is no way I can read all of your posts, but I'll try to read some more. From the ones I have read, I have gotten the impression that you are complaining about what you perceive to be bad caches rather than trying to encourage people to place good ones. This is a subtle but important difference.

Off topic -sorry

7.2k · March 2, 2005

Good post CR.

Thank you.

I think my biggest problem in getting my point across is my own impatience. That and guerrilla posting.

24.7k · March 2, 2005

Solution = STFU.

Simple, right?

You know, I've missed your posts.

24.7k · March 2, 2005

...Angst is as angst does.......

My first girlfriends mom had a quote. Boring is as boring does. I never got it when I was a teen. Then I hit college and I was having a kick butt time. Some people however couldn't have fun if was handed to them in a 12oz can. Then I got it.

This topic was just to generate some discussion on a differnt angle to every other discusion that is dominating the angst o meter. I'm not vested in any solution. :lol:

1.8k · March 2, 2005

Why the angst? Micros are awesome. Some of them are really hard to find and challenging. I like most micros a heck of a lot better than the typical ammo box hidden under a pile of sticks. Some of my favorite caches have been micros. Maybe its just the area I live in, but it seems that most traditional caches in this area are ammo boxes hidden at the bottom of a tree covered by sticks, bark and rotten leaves. No micro angst here, I love micros.

5.3k · March 2, 2005

Why the angst? Micros are awesome.

Not all micros are Awesome, a good portions are not,

What is so awesome about the base of a lamp bost?

What is so awesome about the back of a stop sign?

What is so awesome about a guard rail?

I do not have a problem with these hides, but to say all micros are awesome is nonsense

1.8k · March 2, 2005

but to say all micros are awesome is nonsense

huh ... where did I say that?

March 2, 2005

If we gave them their own catagory, and lowered the 528' rule for OTHER caches placed near a micro to 100' would that help?

Or maybe micro's can only be placed within a towns city limits?

I really enjoy a clever and well thought out micro but many are neither. Just because a city owns a half acre of land along a busy road and then bothered to set up picnic table and 55 gallon trash barrel doesn't mean its a perfect place for a micro. But that's now the trend.

This entire debate is starting to resemble the lame virtual debate that we had about a year ago. The solution was to replace all the virts with micros. Welcome to the future. The lame micro has replaced the lame virtual.

Most of the complaints about micros center around unpopular locations like a WalMart parking lot guardrail or micros placed in the parking area of large parks. Many of the complainers are lamenting the loss of the nice hike with a cache find at the end. Maybe the category we need is the "minimum .5 mile round trip from the closest parking" cache.

March 2, 2005

Maybe the category we need is the "minimum .5 mile round trip from the closest parking" cache.

That would suit me fine.

9.2k · March 2, 2005

Solution = STFU.

Simple, right?

You know, I've missed your posts.

Amen to that.

20.7k · March 2, 2005

...Maybe the category we need is the "minimum .5 mile round trip from the closest parking" cache.

This comment reminds me of the guy who complained because the cache was too near the parking area on ahiking trail. He never realized that you could keep walking on the trail, even after finding the cache.

Well, no one said you always have to park in the closest spot. If one wants to find a cache that requires a hike, go find a cache and take a hike. Park farther away if that what it takes you to get a nice walk in.

Frequently, what I have done when going after urban micros is park the jeep in the general area of a cache. I find that cache and walk to the next one. I keep that up until I get tired or run out of time (lately, its been the former). Then I walk back to the jeep.

18.9k · March 2, 2005

... Maybe the category we need is the "minimum .5 mile round trip from the closest parking" cache.

Heck just leave your car at home and walk the whole way.....if excersise is your goal.

1.8k · March 2, 2005

Maybe the category we need is the "minimum .5 mile round trip from the closest parking" cache.

So ... thats why you have the name, Runaround?

3.3k · March 2, 2005

I looked over my profile page and the top four, best camouflaged caches I listed are all micros. None of them were attached to guardrails, under lamppost, stop signs, etc.

I like creative hidden caches be it micros or regular sized caches. I like to stimulate my mind when looking for a cache. I have spent 10 minutes, or more, looking for well camouflaged micros. I like it when I have to work hard to find the cache. The joy after succesfully finding the hard ones is worth it for me.

An occasional easy cache is nice when i'm trying to keep up with my caching buddy Mojave Jackalope.

March 2, 2005

Well, no one said you always have to park in the closest spot. If one wants to find a cache that requires a hike, go find a cache and take a hike. Park farther away if that what it takes you to get a nice walk in.

I've done this. Some locations don't allow for a very nice walk - just a longer one. And it's not always just the lack of a walk. I'm trying to be nice here - I really do not enjoy most of these hides. I'm glad other people do - that's wonderful. Doesn't help me, though.

7.2k · March 2, 2005

I'm just loving how the people who complain that there are too many restrictions in some areas are proposing more restrictions for other areas.

I know. Let's make a rule that you cannot complain about a cache type until you have found at least 500 of them. I'm liking that! :lol:

March 2, 2005

what the hell is angst anyway??????

regards

archie

March 2, 2005

what the hell is angst anyway??????

angst is the German word for fear.

When used in an English sentence it means apprenhension or dread that something bad is going to happen. Something you just can't put your finger on.

Other good German words that made it into the English language:

schadenfreude = taking pleasure in other's misfortune.

kindergarden = if you need a translation........

zeitgeist = spirit or feeling of the times.

rube = as in "What a rube!", literally "turnip" I didn't just fall off the turnip truck you know!

1.3k · March 2, 2005

I know. Let's make a rule that you cannot complain about a cache type until you have found at least 500 of them. I'm liking that!

Okay, but do we have to find 500 to complain about the people complaining? If so, I had better get busy! :grin:

March 2, 2005

I don't think that I've ever experienced angst while looking for a cache. Reading the forums is another story. :rolleyes:

6.7k · March 2, 2005

Much ado about nothing - the problem doesn't exist, as it was long ago solved by a difficulty / terrain rating.

You want a challenge, don't chase 1/1s

You only have your lunch hour, don't look for a 4/5

Why create problems where none exist?

Ed

March 2, 2005

...Maybe the category we need is the "minimum .5 mile round trip from the closest parking" cache.

This comment reminds me of the guy who complained because the cache was too near the parking area on ahiking trail. He never realized that you could keep walking on the trail, even after finding the cache.

Well, no one said you always have to park in the closest spot. If one wants to find a cache that requires a hike, go find a cache and take a hike. Park farther away if that what it takes you to get a nice walk in.

Frequently, what I have done when going after urban micros is park the jeep in the general area of a cache. I find that cache and walk to the next one. I keep that up until I get tired or run out of time (lately, its been the former). Then I walk back to the jeep.

Maybe our problem is that we complain when we ought to make a suggestion.

Conversely, maybe when we make suggestions, people take them as a complaints.

Anyway, I have discovered the universal answer for the forum. "You can use the feature that filter them out, ya know" :rolleyes:

March 2, 2005

After reading the comments in this thread I had to make one of my own. I don't have a year at this endeavor yet. But I have more caches placed than most other cachers in my area. Micros? Yes, I have place a bunch of them. My rate of placing is about 15% caches that are not micros. For health reasons, treks into the woods that are long and/or involve much physical agility really cause me problems. Are we doing this for what we can get out of the cache or for the fun in finding them? :rolleyes: As others have said, "If you don't like micros, then don't do them." I have micros that you can drive within a few feet of them and then spend a LOT of time trying to find them. :grin: Some of my hardest ones are in plain sight. Complaints that some of mine are too hard to find prompted me to do an E Z series. It is obvious to me that caches in my area that I have as a 4 or 5 difficulty level are not high on the priority list to find. This also is the trend on puzzle caches. Most of the activity surrounds the easy caches. So, do we not do caches for those people that have no desire for adventure or do a variety so you have a choice for your style of caching? I prefer a variety myself.

1.1k · March 2, 2005

Most of the complaints about micros center around unpopular locations like a WalMart parking lot guardrail or micros placed in the parking area of large parks.

Actually, in many cases and areas the issue is that these types of caches are NOT unpopular...and in fact, quite the opposite. And as the popularity of these continues to grow, so too does the redefinition ("devolution"?) of our game.

-Dave R.

March 2, 2005

Most of the complaints about micros center around unpopular locations like a WalMart parking lot guardrail or micros placed in the parking area of large parks.

Actually, in many cases and areas the issue is that these types of caches are NOT unpopular...and in fact, quite the opposite. And as the popularity of these continues to grow, so too does the redefinition ("devolution"?) of our game.

-Dave R.

So then the minority is trying to control the majority? But I forgot the minority is the majority in the forums................Ironic isn't it?

1.1k · March 2, 2005

Most of the complaints about micros center around unpopular locations like a WalMart parking lot guardrail or micros placed in the parking area of large parks.

Actually, in many cases and areas the issue is that these types of caches are NOT unpopular...and in fact, quite the opposite. And as the popularity of these continues to grow, so too does the redefinition ("devolution"?) of our game.

-Dave R.

So then the minority is trying to control the majority? But I forgot the minority is the majority in the forums................Ironic isn't it?

Yeah, now that you mention it.

-Dave R.

6.5k · March 2, 2005

...Maybe the category we need is the "minimum .5 mile round trip from the closest parking" cache.

This comment reminds me of the guy who complained because the cache was too near the parking area on a hiking trail. He never realized that you could keep walking on the trail, even after finding the cache.

Well, no one said you always have to park in the closest spot. If one wants to find a cache that requires a hike, go find a cache and take a hike. Park farther away if that what it takes you to get a nice walk in.

Frequently, what I have done when going after urban micros is park the jeep in the general area of a cache. I find that cache and walk to the next one. I keep that up until I get tired or run out of time (lately, its been the former). Then I walk back to the jeep.

Slightly OT but to give sbell111 and others a quick chuckle-while looking for a micro(McCabe Park) in your home turf last year we observed a guy wearing running gear, power walking laps, in a very small library? parking lot adjacent to the ballfield fence we were searching. He maybe got 20 paces before making a very precise 90 degree turn. It was kinda funny and creepy all in the same. :rolleyes: He was getting his excercise though.

A lesson I learned from my father when biking near their mountain home-it's better to go until you are just past half tired. It will make the ride/walk home a bit more enjoyable. :grin:

PS Reply to Mr. B: couldn't you run a PQ on the caches with the one hour attribute only, scan the dozen or so new ones that appear and toss those into your 'I'm not interested pile' after a quick read of the cache page and finders logs? Not a perfect solution, but working towards one.

Edited March 2, 2005 by wimseyguy

3k · March 2, 2005

There will always be angst. Tinkering with the rules is unlikely to solve it.

I think that about sums it up.

Because it's not just micro angst, it's virtual angst, and my-lame-is-not-the-same-as-your-lame angst, and what-can-I-write-in-the-logs angst, and somebody-is-holding-my-TB angst, and so on ...

Lots more angst in here than there is out there. Which is kinda funny.

edit addedamissingspace

Edited March 2, 2005 by cache_test_dummies

March 2, 2005

You guys can say what you want to and bash micro's all day but when its all said and done at the end of the day, it's all about the hunt. It's not what cool toy I found or how far this TB's been. Its that feeling I get when I find the cache. Big or small. The smaller they are the more challenging it is. Most of the ammo cans I have found, you can see a big pile of leaves and sticks from 50 feet away. That takes some of the fun out of the hunt. I am an avid deer hunter and if I killed a deer everytime I went into the woods, I would get bored with it pretty fast. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE HUNT. Lets enjoy all cache's and try not to bash micro's.

Just my 2 cents..

March 2, 2005

.....
Or maybe micro's can only be placed within a towns city limits?

So that would narrow it down to like 100 square miles of undeveloped open desert that the City of Reno has annexed. I don't even want to think how much open desert is inside the Las Vegas city limits.

A lot :rolleyes:

Even more so, North Las Vegas. They just purchased a HUGE block of land from the BLM

Micro Angst

Recommended Posts

Join the conversation