Is Forum Debate Causing More Micros?

[Trinity's Crew]

I have read and posted about the "lame" cache problem that some people believe is plaguing the game. This discussion invariably leads to examples of parking lot micros, or lamp post micros, so it got me wondering whether all of the debate has gotten people concerned.

 

Maybe all of the forum buzz is reverberating through the GC. community and people are placing micros at an increased rate for fear that new regulations may be on the horizon. Look at how hard it is to get a virtual approved now. That problem was debated here too.

 

Any thoughts?

[+briansnat]

I don't think it is increasing the rate of micro hides, nor do I see a coming crackdown on micros. Micros are not the same animal as virtuals. They are geocaches, virtuals aren't.

 

Actually, I was hoping it would have the opposite effect and cause some people to put a little more thought into their hides.

[Find Now, Log Later?]

I don't think it is increasing the rate of micro hides ... I was hoping it would have the opposite effect and cause some people to put a little more thought into their hides.

 

That doesn't appear to be the way things work around here, where "in your face" seems to be the preferred solution to most issues; so yes, I think the constant debate over "lame micro caches" has caused many a geocacher to go and intentionally place lame micro caches. And that would most definitely include the individual I quoted.

[+drat19]

My personal opinion, respectfully submitted, is that "micro spew" in general, and "what some consider lame micro spew" in particular, is the direct result of the growth of our game in recent months with lots of new players finding a majority of these types of micros ("what some consider lame", or not) and using them as the example for their own hides, because they think "this is what the game is". Plus, it's cheap, easy, and often effortless to hide a fair number of them. Then add the love of some people of getting all those ego-gratifying "Found it" Emails, and so it goes: "Let's hide more!".

 

Of course ALL OF US know that the game is so much more than this, but as this style has perpetuated, in many areas that's considered the norm as opposed to the exception.

 

Dennis Miller's quote, as always, applies: "Of course that's just my opinion, I could be wrong."

 

-Dave R. in Biloxi

Edited March 2, 2005 by drat19

[+The Leprechauns]

To the contrary, the recent discussions helped motivate me to place a 3/3.5 mystery cache featuring a hellacious thorny bushwack over the edge of a steep hill, followed by a wet slog up a stream bed until the ammo box is found. It was the first cache I'd hidden since November 2003, and it was placed in the county just west of me, where the last fifteen cache placements had been park and grabs at places like K-Mart and the local ice cream stand.

 

So much for "all the good spots are taken." I've had my eye on this area for years and nobody beat me to it.

 

If you want to increase cache quality, go hide a quality cache, meaning a good example of the type that you like.

 

EDIT: To link to An Ghaoth agus an Ghrian agus an Elves.

Edited March 2, 2005 by The Leprechauns

[+briansnat]

My personal opinion, respectfully submitted, is that "micro spew" in general, and "what some consider lame micro spew" in particular, is the direct result of the growth of our game in recent months with lots of new players finding a majority of these types of micros ("what some consider lame", or not) and using them as the example for their own hides, because they think "this is what the game is". Plus, it's cheap, easy, and often effortless to hide a fair number of them. Then add the love of some people of getting all those ego-gratifying "Found it" Emails, and so it goes: "Let's hide more!".

 

I think you're right on the money. People tend to hide what they find. If they're finding micros, that's what they hide. If they're finding ammo boxes you'll see a lot of that. That explains why the predominant type of cache differs from region to region.

[Tahosa and Sons]

If you want to increase cache quality, go hide a quality cache, meaning a good example of the type that you like.

 

EDIT: To link to An Ghaoth agus an Ghrian agus an Elves.

Well said Lep but I can allready here your EMails on that one.

From the perspective finder : As Béarla led thoil?

And Leps reply:

Sláinte agus saol agat

Bean ar do mhian agat

Leanbh gach blian agat

Agus bás n Éireann

 

And my thoughts on micros, lame or otherwise. a cacher makes the choice to look for them so what is the problem.

 

And I'm about to plant two quality micros that will really be different. And when you make them different cachers really enjoy them. Keep them different, exciting and difficult to find and you will have them applauding your hides, that is what it is all about.

 

And one more message to all the cachers out there.

Beannachtaí na Féile Pádraig

[+drat19]

If you want to increase cache quality, go hide a quality cache, meaning a good example of the type that you like.

And I'm about to plant two quality micros that will really be different. And when you make them different cachers really enjoy them. Keep them different, exciting and difficult to find and you will have them applauding your hides, that is what it is all about.

Well said.

 

And I would add: ...and choose your location well!

 

-Dave R.

Edited March 2, 2005 by drat19

[Trinity's Crew]

I have no problem with any type of cache. There are some types that I enjoy more than others, but I'm sure that's true for most people. But I wondered (and posted the question) do you think the recent threads in the forums railing against "lame" caches, i. e. parking lot micros, etc... is causing the casual forum reader to place this type of cache. There could be many possible reasons for this:

 

1. As I stated in the topic starter, they really enjoy this type of hide and want to make sure they get one out there (grandfather clause) for fear that new, more stringent guidelines may be on the horizon.

 

2. They don't like the posts and this gives them an opportunity to "fight back".

 

3. It give some an opportunity to "thumb their nose" at the more prolific posters on the subject.

 

I don't know if any of this is occurring, I just wondered if it might be.

 

And a lot of other possible reasons that I haven't thought about.

 

Edit to add last comment

Edited March 2, 2005 by Trinity's Crew

[+RuffRidr]

do you think the recent threads in the forums railing against "lame" caches, i. e. parking lot micros, etc... is causing the casual forum reader to place this type of cache. There could be many possible reasons for this:

 

1. As I stated in the topic starter, they really enjoy this type of hide and want to make sure they get one out there (grandfather clause) for fear that new, more stringent guidelines may be on the horizon.

 

I haven't seen one person on any of these threads that has said that they want micros banned. Not one. I don't think any one is even asking for any kind of added restrictions to be placed on them. So I don't see any reason why someone should place a cache out of fear of this happening. In my opinion, their fear is unfounded.

 

2. They don't like the posts and this gives them an opportunity to "fight back".

 

There could be a bit of this happening. I don't see how it have any effect, though, since the posters are unlikely to ever see these caches.

 

3. It give some an opportunity to "thumb their nose" at the more prolific posters on the subject.

 

Same as #2. First, it wouldn't have any effect on the poster if they didn't see them. Second, and I think this is important, no one is really against micros. I repeat, it is not the micros that people have a problem with. It is ILL THOUGHT OUT micros. You know, the ones with no redeeming value. The ones that sole reason of existence is to stroke the ego of the hider and give him one more hide to pad his numbers.

 

So, maybe it will boost the micro numbers. If they're good ones, then great!

 

--RuffRidr

[+Team Perks]

I hide the type of cache I want to, whenever I want to. Frankly, the forums have zero impact on the sort of caches I search for and hide.

 

The people I know who are out placing slews of micros don't even read the forums. Can someone explain the link to me?

[Trinity's Crew]

Ban them? Maybe not. Suggestions to modify the rules in an attempt to weed out the "bad" ones? Yes, though I am not advocating anything like this.

 

In my mind, #2 is more along the lines of fighting (with no intentional malice) a "perceived injustice" for the while #3 is more like "%#*% you! Nobody will tell me what to place or where to place it!"

Perhaps a subtle difference, and no need to list them both.

 

As for whether there is direct impact to the posters, I guess it depends on one's proximity to them.

[+The Leprechauns]

Bear in mind that only a very, very small percentage of the community reads these forums. Granted, many of us hold positions of influence within our local communities, but still, we can't hold a gun to someone's head and say go hide a lame tupperware 50 feet from parking, or an ammo box 3 miles down a bike trail, or a micro at a scenic overlook.

 

The four geocachers/teams who have been hiding bunches of micros in Southwestern Pennsylvania lately have a grand total of zero forum posts among them.

[Trinity's Crew]

The people I know who are out placing slews of micros don't even read the forums. Can someone explain the link to me?

I'm not sure that there is one. That's why I asked the question. I see from your post (and some others) that there may not be any. Thanks!

[+AtoZ]

I try not to make LAME micros but the biggest problem is the response that the finders give. TNLNSL I mean it is so inspriring to want and go spend $10.00 plus on a cache where alls you get is TNLNSL TFTC. I so if your not going to put out a lot of goodies in a cachy why bother with a regular sized container and wast the $5.00 for it, when I have a bag of micro containers at the house. So it is NOT just the hiders fault it is the finders. I mena part of the reason you hide a cache is the gratification you get from the logs but page after page of TNLNSL in a well placed cache with lost of goodies leads on eo just place a micro.

cheers

[+drat19]

I try not to make LAME micros but the biggest problem is the response that the finders give. TNLNSL I mean it is so inspriring to want and go spend $10.00 plus on a cache where alls you get is TNLNSL TFTC. I so if your not going to put out a lot of goodies in a cachy why bother with a regular sized container and wast the $5.00 for it, when I have a bag of micro containers at the house. So it is NOT just the hiders fault it is the finders. I mena part of the reason you hide a cache is the gratification you get from the logs but page after page of TNLNSL in a well placed cache with lost of goodies leads on eo just place a micro.

cheers

You raise an interesting point, and also ironic...since on another hotly-discussed thread here lately we've been told that TNLNSL and the like are preferable to actually providing any commentary if it's not "all good".

 

-Dave R.

[+Team Perks]

I try not to make LAME micros but the biggest problem is the response that the finders give.  TNLNSL  I mean it is so inspriring to want and go spend $10.00 plus on a cache where alls you get is TNLNSL TFTC.  I so if your not going to put out a lot of goodies in a cachy why bother with a regular sized container and wast the $5.00 for it, when I have a bag of micro containers at the house.  So it is NOT just the hiders fault it is the finders.  I mena part of the reason you hide a cache is the gratification you get from the logs but page after page of TNLNSL in a well placed cache with lost of goodies leads on eo just place a micro. 

cheers

I fear this is beginning to stray off-topic a bit, but...

 

You know, I rarely get "TNLNSL" logs. I know some people aren't as verbose as others, but my favorite cache hides DO get positive, inspiring logs that make me want to hide more.

 

Oddly, I can buy an ammo can for pretty much the same price of a can of Altoids. If I'm on a tight budget that month, I can go to the dollar store and get enough stuff to fill the ammo can and not break the bank. It doesn't cost much more to make a regular-sized container.

 

For whatever else it's worth, many of my micros have in fact cost MORE than a standard ammo can hide. One micro cost me upwards of $50 to purchase and assemble.

Edited March 2, 2005 by Team Perks

[+Mr. Snazz]

Raw meat causes maggots, right?

[+Mr.Benchmark]

I try not to make LAME micros but the biggest problem is the response that the finders give.  TNLNSL  I mean it is so inspriring to want and go spend $10.00 plus on a cache where alls you get is TNLNSL TFTC.  I so if your not going to put out a lot of goodies in a cachy why bother with a regular sized container and wast the $5.00 for it, when I have a bag of micro containers at the house.  So it is NOT just the hiders fault it is the finders.  I mena part of the reason you hide a cache is the gratification you get from the logs but page after page of TNLNSL in a well placed cache with lost of goodies leads on eo just place a micro. 

cheers

You raise an interesting point, and also ironic...since on another hotly-discussed thread here lately we've been told that TNLNSL and the like are preferable to actually providing any commentary if it's not "all good".

 

-Dave R.

I've certainly heard more than one person who hides slews of micros express to me the dismay about people who trade unkindly and log 'TNLNSL'. On the other hand, I've never observed these same folks to ever hide anything worth trading, either. So who knows? I do think that selfish finders can make people not want to bother placing decent trade items in their caches. And if you aren't going to do that - why not place a micro?

 

Here locally, I don't think what goes on in the forums has much to do with people's attitudes. A great many of the cachers here locally take great pride in IGNORING what goes on in these forums. The irony is that they are unaware of how many would agree with them, and their placement of huge quantities of micros.

 

I believe the reason micros have proliferated are quite simple:

1. Some people are really motivated to increase their stats quickly.

2. Virtuals, as a way to abuse the stats, were pretty much eliminated

3. None of the dynamics that made people want to boost their stats changed, so the explosion of micros began.

Many of these are easy to find, take little physical effort, and count just the same as a cache that takes you all day to find. For the hider, you get tons of "I found it" logs, mostly positive ones. There are folks here locally who are racing to reach milestones for the number of caches they hide, not just find. We have folks who celebrate reaching 1000 finds / 100 hides - it's a big deal. BTW, I see nothing wrong with this.

 

It's not neccessarily just the stats - a lot of folks just like the easy ones. They want to go find a cache at lunch. Some of the more traditional types of caches sometimes leave you going back to work smelling like the creek you fell into. Not a good thing for most of us. Some people with young children want to play this game. Again, nothing wrong with any of this.

 

I see these easy micros as being a lot like fast-food. They are convenient and a fairly sure thing.

 

There's nothing inherently wrong or evil about any of this - but the dynamic has lead to certain, very simple, types of caches to overwhelm other types in some areas - in some places almost to the exclusion of everything else. (It certainly seems that way in my area lately.) A couple of years ago here in Dallas, the really easy ones were the exception, rather than the rule. Now it's exactly the opposite. The end result here is that our outdoor activity greatly resembles an easter egg hunt.

 

That's the main reason I've been complaining - "don't hunt 'em if you don't like 'em" is only really helpful advice if someone is placing any of the type you like.

[CoyoteRed]

...helped motivate me to place a 3/3.5 mystery cache featuring a hellacious thorny bushwack over the edge of a steep hill, followed by a wet slog up a stream bed until the ammo box is found.

Ooh, don't let Sissy get wind of this or she might be planning our next vacation up around PA.

 

This is the type of cache she prefers, bar none.

[+Renegade Knight]

Actually in my case yes.

 

I was out of the lame cache biz, done with my own rule of one cache a month placed. I was working on a night cache (ready to place) a Mystery cache along the lines of CSI or Missing.

 

But all the debate has me wondering if I could actually place a micro, that is horrible in every sence of the word. If you could labelt as a lame cache, say not to find it because it will be lame and if still they will come. If I could clame the title of worlds worst (but viable) cache. My muse has been inspired by the forums and it means the Mystery cache will have to wait.

Edited March 2, 2005 by Renegade Knight

[+briansnat]

I don't think it is increasing the rate of micro hides ... I was hoping it would have the opposite effect and cause some people to put a little more thought into their hides.

 

That doesn't appear to be the way things work around here, where "in your face" seems to be the preferred solution to most issues; so yes, I think the constant debate over "lame micro caches" has caused many a geocacher to go and intentionally place lame micro caches. And that would most definitely include the individual I quoted.

The person you quoted currently owns 3 micros out of 86 active hides. While the overall quality of these micros can be debated, none are in Walmart parking lots, attached to dumpsters or in similar, unappealing areas.

[+Team Perks]

But all the debate has me wondering if I could actually place a micro, that is horrible in every sence of the word. If you could labelt as a lame cache, say not to find it because it will be lame and if still they will come. If I could clame the title of worlds worst (but viable) cache. My muse has been inspired by the forums and it means the Mystery cache will have to wait.

Apparently, quite a few people will find such a cache!

 

Sadly enough, I'm specifically planning to visit that cache on my next trip to Arizona.

[Find Now, Log Later?]

I don't think it is increasing the rate of micro hides ... I was hoping it would have the opposite effect and cause some people to put a little more thought into their hides.

 

That doesn't appear to be the way things work around here, where "in your face" seems to be the preferred solution to most issues; so yes, I think the constant debate over "lame micro caches" has caused many a geocacher to go and intentionally place lame micro caches. And that would most definitely include the individual I quoted.

The person you quoted currently owns 3 micros out of 86 active hides. While the overall quality of these micros can be debated, none are in Walmart parking lots, attached to dumpsters or in similar, unappealing areas.

I don't recall the percentage of "lame" caches placed or currently active being part of the conversation.

 

Are you saying that you did not, in fact, initiate your "Lame" series of caches (regardless of their actual degree of "lameness") in response to one or more of the many "lame" forum threads? If so, then that's more revisionism than I can stomach for one morning.

[+AtoZ]

Hummmmmm not sure if I got slammed or what. I am responsible for some of the hardes caches in my area. Some average 20+ hours to complete. One took almost 2 weeks of 24/7 by the first two finders racing each other to solve it. Yes I get some very nice logs. Some of the proudest I have is from a guy that always coment show easy a cache in his log but in a couple of mine he has had to try two or three time and then need help. Not much but you feel like you doing something. I feel a cache should hava an entertainment value. That may not be a wonderful view, which there is an over abundance here in Colorado, but was it more then a altoids tin in a rock pile. I mean I like moving rocks as much as the next person but I would rather wander around a field wondering where could you put a cache in such a bleak place. So did I just snatch and grad or did it take a few moment of thought to see if I could out guess the hider.

Even on friend mostly just SL a log on the average.

cheers

[+wimseyguy]

But all the debate has me wondering if I could actually place a micro, that is horrible in every sence of the word.  If you could labelt as a lame cache, say not to find it because it will be lame and if still they will come.  If I could clame the title of worlds worst (but viable) cache.  My muse has been inspired by the forums and it means the Mystery cache will have to wait.

Apparently, quite a few people will find such a cache!

 

Sadly enough, I'm specifically planning to visit that cache on my next trip to Arizona.

I found that quite inspiring. But since I already own one cache that sucks; I'll refrain from hiding something like that AZ cache for a while. It did make me smile though.

[+briansnat]

Are you saying that you did not, in fact, initiate your "Lame" series of caches (regardless of their actual degree of "lameness") in response to one or more of the many "lame" forum threads?

 

I can say with authority that the lame series was not started in response to anything that was written in the forums.

[+Renegade Knight]

...

Apparently, quite a few people will find such a cache!

 

Sadly enough, I'm specifically planning to visit that cache on my next trip to Arizona.

That will be hard to top.

[+clearpath]

so it got me wondering whether all of the debate has gotten people concerned.

Yes, and Master Debating is causing me to go blind.

[Trinity's Crew]

Yes, and Master Debating is causing me to go blind.

Do your palms need shaving?

[Find Now, Log Later?]

I can say with authority that the lame series was not started in response to anything that was written in the forums.

Wonderful. And regardless of whether you state it with "authority" or "conviction," I believe you, Brian; I really do. That's why I find it so peculiar that a couple of your forum postings from the week prior to the appearance of your first "Lame" series cache appear to indicate otherwise.

[+mtn-man]

I can say with authority that the lame series was not started in response to anything that  was written in the forums.

Wonderful. And regardless of whether you state it with "authority" or "conviction," I believe you, Brian; I really do. That's why I find it so peculiar that a couple of your forum postings from the week prior to the appearance of your first "Lame" series cache appear to indicate otherwise.

Take your personal bickering to emails or private messages please.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

Yes, the forum debate is leading to more lame micros, because you are all yapping about it here instead of putting that energy into making good regular caches, now you better straighten up before I have to pull the car over! You know it's not too late to turn around and go hame! Ummm... JUST KIDDING!!!

[+Byron & Anne]

Here's one for you. It's been archived a long time

[+Renegade Knight]

...

Apparently, quite a few people will find such a cache!

 

Sadly enough, I'm specifically planning to visit that cache on my next trip to Arizona.

That will be hard to top.

Can't do it. There are actually a lot of logistics and planning in a truly bad cache.

[+BadAndy]

This debate has given me a cool idea for a cache. It will satisfy all sides of the debate, even the lightpole crowd.

[+drat19]

... now you better straighten up before I have to pull the car over!

Hey, pull over over there...there's a wet 35mm container under that lamppost base!

[+Team Tigger International]

I think this one resulted in forum angst against what SOME call "Lame" micros'

 

The Worlds Lamest Micro

 

*hangs head* yeah We had to post a DNF on it TO !! But we will be back !

 

Star

[+cache_test_dummies]

I think this one resulted in forum angst against what SOME call "Lame" micros'

 

The Worlds Lamest Micro

From that cache page:

 

Feel free to vent your spleen in the logs, complain away and tell me how bad this cache is. Any logs containing any positive remarks whatsoever risk deletion!

[+welch]

I have read and posted about the "lame" cache problem that some people believe is plaguing the game. This discussion invariably leads to examples of parking lot micros, or lamp post micros, so it got me wondering whether all of the debate has gotten people concerned.

 

Maybe all of the forum buzz is reverberating through the GC. community and people are placing micros at an increased rate for fear that new regulations may be on the horizon. Look at how hard it is to get a virtual approved now. That problem was debated here too.

 

Any thoughts?

All kinds of problems are debated here.....

 

but no I don't think its spurring micro placements. Most cachers don't visit the gc.com forums, and many wouldn't know guideline change unless the approvers send um an email

[+Ed & Julie]

Here in Northern California, there has been a bunch of new cachers placing micros like there is no tomorrow.

 

That's what they are finding (some of the "older cachers" in the area pride themselves on there micro placment skills) so that's what the new guys are hiding.

 

My problem is most of the new cachers are mis-labeling their micros as "small". To the new cacher, an altiods tin is a small, since the trend is toward smaller and smaller miscro (bison tubes, etc).

 

Most of the cachers in my area do not read the forums, but my local caching group does have a message board on Yahoo Groups. I invite all new local cachers to join, and regularly bring up hot topic issues found here over to the local message board to help educate them (rarely works, but gives me something to do).

 

Ed

[+The GeoGadgets Team]

You raise an interesting point, and also ironic...since on another hotly-discussed thread here lately we've been told that TNLNSL and the like are preferable to actually providing any commentary if it's not "all good".

There is/was a gentleman Geocacher in the Portland, OR-area who, when logging his finds online, let loose with these totally cool, very interesting, but hardly to the point log posts. One could've put all of his posts together and published them. It couldn't have been any worse than any thing Hunter Thompson wrote...

 

His forum posts were equally facsinating. I would remember his name if I read it, but for the moment, I'm having a old-timer's attack...

 

I, being the chronicler of our Geocaching team, like to leave details of our exploits in the posted cache logs. Some people tell me how much they enjoy reading them. I have heard, and probably won't hear, from those who dislike my posts. Not that I care, either way. If I do write "TNLNSL, TFTH!" it is just before my signature/user name in the log. And when folks post to my caches, I appreciate knowing how they feel about them, the area they were hidden in, and what condition the cache is in.

 

Thanks for your support...

[Moun10Bike]

His forum posts were equally facsinating. I would remember his name if I read it, but for the moment, I'm having a old-timer's attack...

oregone