A Kick In The Goolies

[+Pharisee]

It’s been a bit quite here just lately so I thought I’d stir things up a bit by giving it a gentle kick in that well known ‘soft spot’... Micro caches.

 

This was prompted by something MarcB wrote earlier in his now locked thread:

 

I'm slowly seeing an increasing amount of lame micro caches appearing…..

 

Funnily enough, I’ve noticed the same thing. Fair enough... We all know that there are locations that will only support a micro and I have no objection what so ever to them. It’s the 35mm film pot tucked away in a hole in a tree in the middle of a wood that I’m starting to object too. Hey, you micro setters... How long will it take for you to realise that 35mm film pots aren’t weatherproof. Just about every one I’ve ever found had contained, at best, a damp piece of paper pretending to be a log book and at worst a soggy mess.

 

We’ve all probably seen posts in various threads where cachers have said words to the effect... “I’ve just got a carrier bag full of film pots from Boots... Look out for all my new caches”. To these people, I suspect it’s a cheap, easy, no brain alternative to placing a proper cache. No ammo can / Tupperware box to source, no trade goodies to obtain... jeez... They don’t even supply a pencil in 9 out of 10 cases!!! They just wander up the nearest footpath / towpath / bridleway and sprinkle ‘em about like confetti. Great if you just want a quick way to boost your COTM rating for the month.

 

We all know what happened when TPTB noticed the ever-increasing number of rubbish virtual caches that were being submitted. Now you have to convince the reviewers that a regular cache (yes... even a micro) cannot be placed at the location, before a virtual cache is approved. Personally, I think the game has benefited from that.

 

The time has come to do the same with all these lame micros... They should only be listed if the setter can satisfy our reviewers that it’s not possible to place a proper cache, with goodies and a real logbook, at the chosen location.

 

[stands back and waits for the abuse…..]

[+Simply Paul]

Some good points well made

 

My personal approach to Micros is they add variety to the game. There are some cunning hides in Oxford because of micros and so long as the cache page says it's a micro that I'm looking for, I'm happy. I'm all about the hunt, not the contents so I'm cool with them.

 

I have placed a few 'traditional' micros and used them in multis and puzzles too, but only as elements, not the final cache (bar one puzzle in Beaconsfield where there was no cover for a full sized cache). If I don't need to walk far, and it's not a total adventure (big multi/puzzle) to find it, I'm quite happy with a micro. However I do feel if someone puts a big effort in to find a cache they deserve to find a full-sized box at the end of it, whenever possible.

 

Perhaps more of an issue of cache-hiding is sending people up a random footpath/towpath/bridleway with little or nothing to recommend it over another footpath/towpath/bridleway just to find a cache, of whatever size.

 

SP

Edited March 14, 2005 by Simply Paul

[Nediam]

Right! lets start the abuse

Only joking

 

I have to admit to placing a micro. It is my first cache placement but in all fairness if you visit the site, you'll see why it has to be a micro......an ammo box would stick out like a sore thumb

 

By the way, my cache is an official Geocaching micro cache so it SHOULD stay dry as it has a rubber seal (fingers crossed).

 

I have only done a couple of micro caches and don't really have a problem with them but sometimes it is nice to have swaps.

 

I take it no-one has objections to using a micro as part of a multi leading to a "normal" sized cache?

[+Stuey]

I agree. I admit to placing 6 micros in Exeter in places where there is no way you can hide a regular container... In fact, it was difficult finding places to hide some of the micros. They have their place, but should be located where it is not easily possible to place a "proper" box.

[+Seasider]

The time has come to do the same with all these lame micros... They should only be listed if the setter can satisfy our reviewers that it’s not possible to place a proper cache, with goodies and a real logbook, at the chosen location.

 

Right with you on that one my old chum!

 

Cheers!

 

Seasider

[markandlynn]

I'd rather find a micro than than a virtual, and i'd rather find an ammo box than a micro.

But i'd also like to get people to visit all the cool areas somewhere has to offer, is it OK to set a multi cache with lots of micros at the cool places leading to one final ammo box or should you set lots of loggable micro caches leading to an ammo box ie one smiley or lots of smiley's?

 

It's all about location, location, location.

Is'nt this what ignore lists were created for ?

 

I'll leave the abuse for later

[+wildlifewriter]

[stands back and waits for the abuse…..]

 

No abuse from over here. I agree with every single word.

 

And it's about time someone made that point about film pots not being waterproof. (Unless you glue the lids on, which limits their functionality as a cache.)

 

I use small tab-lock boxes 10x8x2cm, which CAN hold a proper log (with pencil) and some small swap items. A "proper" mini-cache - and they'll go almost anywhere that a 35mm could be placed.

[+Pengy&Tigger]

We`ve placed a few micro`s, usually as part of a series. A few sneaky hard to find micro-micro caches too. And even the odd heavily disguised micro. But never just a 35mm canister on it`s own as the main cache, stuck in a tree stump. (edit: apart from Temple View but there is something to see (just!))

 

Although we have now bought a ream of waterproof paper, as I can agreed that they aren`t very waterproof. And are gradually replacing the logs with them in micro`s.

 

We don`t mind micro caches, as long as it is stated as that. Rooting around looking for a box, only to find a cache ammendment, saying replaced with a micro, isn`t really on. Rather they just archive it, or move the final location.

 

A note to micro placers though, a gluegun and a lick of paint helps a lot in the disguising of a 35mm container. (What us?... ohh never the thought would never cross our minds )

 

On the other foot, I can see why people would place micro`s, seeing as the contents of our caches seem to have took a bit of a downturn. But we`ll just have to recycle a little more I think.

 

Pengy

Edited March 14, 2005 by Pengy&Tigger

[Dill the Dog]

I'd rather find a micro than than a virtual, and i'd rather find an ammo box than a micro.

I'd rather find an interesting Virtual than a boring micro. I don't take or leave stuff - I'm more interested in the location and the reason for the locations. As you say, Location Location Location!

[Deego]

I would rather walk to a nice location and find a damp micro, than find a ammo can in a bad location. But that’s just me

[+Birders]

We don't mind micros. We have several out ourselves and we used film containers sealed in small plastic bags. When we first decided to put out a micro we bought one of the "genuine" micro containers. It cost an arm and a leg and it's very conspicuous so we're scared to put it out!

[Nediam]

We don't mind micros. We have several out ourselves and we used film containers sealed in small plastic bags. When we first decided to put out a micro we bought one of the "genuine" micro containers. It cost an arm and a leg and it's very conspicuous so we're scared to put it out!

I sprayed mine green, to match it's surroundings

[markandlynn]

We don't mind micros. We have several out ourselves and we used film containers sealed in small plastic bags. When we first decided to put out a micro we bought one of the "genuine" micro containers. It cost an arm and a leg and it's very conspicuous so we're scared to put it out!

A thin smear of vaseline arround the lid helps keep em sealed. Had one on trial outside for 4 week now and this seems to work.

[+John & Hazel]

[stands back and waits for the abuse…..]

No abuse from me. I tend to agree on the majority of what you have said.

John

[+G Force]

Simply Paul  Posted: Mar 14 2005, 05:10 AM 

 

Some good points well made

 

My personal approach to Micros is they add variety to the game.

 

I tend to agree with SP as everyone does it for different reasons and I enjoy the variety. Yes, I have been fustrated looking for a micro thinking it could of been a larger container but then it adds to the challenge.

I've also done some virtuals and micros which I thought were very good better than some ammo boxes full of swaps that I have found.

I've hidden a micro where it could of been a regular container nearby but did so as it was short walk to the cache site and wanted a little bit of a challenge by having the cachers having to look for it.

[+Globetrotter.uk]

I would rather walk to a nice location and find a damp micro, than find a ammo can in a bad location. But that’s just me

Quite agree, I have foumd some great walking places due to a micro being set up there.

[+Pharisee]

I would rather walk to a nice location and find a damp micro, than find a ammo can in a bad location. But that’s just me

Quite agree, I have foumd some great walking places due to a micro being set up there.

You make a fair point and I can't fault your logic but by the same token, wouldn't you rather walk to the aforementioned 'nice location' and find a dry, well stocked ammo can rather than a damp micro?? That's the point I'm trying to get across.

 

I'm not saying 'all micros are rubbish'. Of course there is a place in the game for them the same as there's a place for virtuals and even locationless caches.

It's the growing trend towards placing micro caches in locations that could equally support a full size cache that I dislike. I deliberately didn't mention the 'child treasure hunt' aspect because I never go caching with children (except Omally) as I generally hate the little bu**ers, but a lot of families do and I can't imagine that a damp micro holds much appeal to them. A very nice walk that would be enjoyed by a family if it was populated by real caches stands a good chance of being ignored / rejected by the same family if all it holds is a series of damp logs in 35mm film pots and no goodies for the kids to swap. That's a shame.

[+What's Job]

We don't mind micros either- much better than a box hidden under an obvious arrangement of sticks or stones- maybe from finders not the original, but sometimes it's so obvious from miles away.

 

At least micros take more finding, and must say the film canisters we have come across seem to have been more weatherproof than many other containers.

 

Can't ever criticise micros having done Pengy and Tiggers Dominoes and Dice series this weekend!

[+The White Family]

I would rather walk to a nice location and find a damp micro, than find a ammo can in a bad location. But that’s just me

Quite agree, I have foumd some great walking places due to a micro being set up there.

wouldn't you rather walk to the aforementioned 'nice location' and find a dry, well stocked ammo can rather than a damp micro??

Don't mind, really. It's the location, not the type of container, that matters. Caching takes me to places I wouldn't otherwise have gone to.

 

I don't recall finding a damp 35mm canister - maybe we've just been lucky. Breath strip containers, however, appear to be porous.

 

Alan

[+Alibags]

I don't mind micros. Mind you, I always place the largest cache (that I have) that the location will allow. Sometimes this is a micro. I have replaced a small cache with a micro at one place due to danger of muggling (previous was muggled).

 

Quality of caches to me has never seemed to tie in with size of caches. Mind you, if a cache is not exactly challenging, I would rather the final target be a big box full of loot than a micro. But I have done lame ammo boxes and excellent micro caches, so size isn't everything, it's what you do with it!

Edited March 14, 2005 by Alibags

[+CuplaKiwis]

Agree with most of all of the above

 

To me, location is 90% of most caches regardless of cache size/container. I'm (usually) a TNLN, so doesn't make a lot of difference in this respect. In fact, I would much rather find a disguised micro than a 'plain' tupperware or ammo any day of the week.

 

Exceptions to my location comment are the puzzles, where the location can be very plain, but the pleasure is in the thought (/luck) required.

 

Micros have a place, but perish the thought of two in every car park!!

[+The Roos]

I'd rather find a micro than than a virtual, and i'd rather find an ammo box than a micro.

But i'd also like to get people to visit all the cool areas somewhere has to offer, is it OK to set a multi cache with lots of micros at the cool places leading to one final ammo box or should you set lots of loggable micro caches leading to an ammo box ie one smiley or lots of smiley's?

 

It's all about location, location, location.

Is'nt this what ignore lists were created for ?

 

I'll leave the abuse for later

oh er that sounds a bit scary - where is this ignore list and who decides who goes on it

[+Pharisee]

oh er that sounds a bit scary - where is this ignore list and who decides who goes on it

At the top, right of every cache page is the option to ignore the cache and YOU decide which caches you want to ignore.

[+Cryptik Souls Crew]

The time has come to do the same with all these lame micros... They should only be listed if the setter can satisfy our reviewers that it’s not possible to place a proper cache, with goodies and a real logbook, at the chosen location.

Couldn't agree more.

 

A micro can be a great cache (The Oracle Micro in Reading for example) but most are lame. As soon as I see a cache is a micro I tend to lose interest.

[+What's Job]

To reply to Pharisee's lastpost- what does that mean- surely everyone ignores or chooses which caches for themselves?

[+The Roos]

OK phew thats actually not as scary as it first sounded!!! Bit like Big Brother then - who goes - you decide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[+Pharisee]

To reply to Pharisee's lastpost- what does that mean- surely everyone ignores or chooses which caches for themselves?

I've never actually used it but I assume that if you choose to ignore a cache it will be ommited from any of your PQ lists that might otherwise include it.

[+Kitty Hawk]

<deleted>

 

Pharisee types faster

Edited March 14, 2005 by Kitty Hawk

[+What's Job]

Sorry- think I have lost the plot- can anyone please spell out Geocaching(North) etiquette to me.

 

I have never been a "cliquey" person but would like to be part of this clique.

 

Don't understand half the posts- or is this that intentional?

 

Please let me kneo

 

H

[+stu_and_sarah]

We all know that there are locations that will only support a micro and I have no objection what so ever to them. It’s the 35mm film pot tucked away in a hole in a tree in the middle of a wood that I’m starting to object too.

I have to agree. We've found a few 35mm film cannister micros and noticed that the location would have been suitable to hide an ammo box.

 

It still suprises me when there are films cans with no pencil in it. It's quite easy to cut one down with a hacksaw. I've even been known to do so myself.

 

I have to admit to carrying a few miniture pencils around with me in my "cache repair kit" and placing one myself every so often. I usually put the odd trade in film can caches which have no swaps in too if there is sufficient room.

 

Sarah

--

Edited March 14, 2005 by stu_and_sarah

[+What's Job]

We always carry a pen, and a bsag and a small post it note pad, and...........just wonder what the perfect geocaching rucksack would contain?

[+Kitty Hawk]

Hmm, you've lost me on that one - geocaching (North) etiquette?

Edited March 14, 2005 by Kitty Hawk

[+What's Job]

Sorry- just feeling like don't know what's going on- relative virgin I suppose

 

We have loved everything so far and never had much criticism

 

I'tsa wake up call to me to come on here and see so much

 

So many people have put efort in to give others pleasure

 

Just seems it aint good enough

 

We've had lots of pleasure- just shows why we haven't hidden any yet

 

Enough said

[+reveritt]

I hope you will permit a comment from a Yank.

 

This debate has been raging all over the forums, and I'm not surprised to see that you have the same issue in the UK. But there is a new, and more controversial development that is being seen more often in my neighborhood--nanocaches.

 

I'm talking about micros that are considerably smaller than a 35mm film pot. Bits of tubing 1/4 inch in diameter, and an inch or two long, for example. Inside is a tiny piece of paper, rolled up--that's the log. The possibilities for disguising and hiding such an object are endless.

 

Recently, I found (after much searching) a cache that was a pine cone with the stem hollowed out. The cavity was perhaps 3/32 inch in diameter. The cone was wired (where else?) to a pine tree using a bit of green wire. People searched for hours before finding it. I only found it because a previous finder gave me a hint.

 

I protested to the owner, who told me that I should have spotted the pine cone as belonging to a different species of evergreen entirely. Imagine my embarassment at not having spotted that.

 

Now, some might argue that this sort of cache is not as "lame" as a film pot in a lamppost, because it requires some effort and cleverness. That is true, but it is damned near impossible to find, and when placed, it takes up a radius of one-tenth mile, like any other cache, thereby excluding more conventional hides.

 

Has this sort of thing been seen in the UK yet?

[+G Force]

reveritt Posted on Mar 14 2005, 01:57 PM

Has this sort of thing been seen in the UK yet?

 

Not yet , but now that you have gave someone (not mentioning any names) the idea I think they will start showing up.

[+What's Job]

Learning more every minute- what are the criteria for an approved normal cache

 

Not surprising we dont hide them-- could work out maths from pengy and tigger no problem- my problem is working out all the etiqiette'- northern or not

Seems like this thing is very cliquey

[+badger]

I was in the process of hiding my first cache, as I wanted to offer something back to the area after finding a few caches.

I had discussed my idea for the hide this weekend with a more experienced cacher at a photography meet, but seeing this dislike (for want of a better word) for film canister caches, I'm not sure that I'll go ahead with it now...

 

Matt

(inexperienced, but in it for the find and location, not just the treasure)

Edited March 14, 2005 by mattwaggie

[+Simply Paul]

Seems like this thing is very cliquey

 

Oh I don't think so. I joined caching 'late', in 2003, and found existing cachers nothing but supportive, helpful and pleasant. You can't please all the people all the time, so just follow the guidelines, speak to either of our wonderful cache-reviewers, and place your cache. If it's a bit rubbish... it's your first one! What do people expect?! You can be sure your second one will be better. And the third better than that. And if anyone ever says 'I don't think much of your cache' you can remember you followed the guidelines, spoke to L and/or E and that you can't please everyone all the time!

 

SP

[+kbootb]

I see the thread has moved on to 'fiendish' disguised caches. This seems to be a rising trend around here.

 

To be honest I'm not convinced that I like these, but I understand that others do. I really prefer the walk in a nice location and finding a well hidden but essentially findable cache, rather than the challenge of cracking the particular hiding technique.

 

I'm not really all that keen on spending an hour hunting for a branch that has been hollowed out, or an artificial dog poo when I could be walking and discovering other areas.

 

I hadn't really thought about it but I seem to have set myself a 10 minute limit for a micro, but will spend double that or more if it is a full sized cache.

 

I suppose how long I hang around also depends on how nice the area is and how many people are around.

 

So if the point is discovering a nice interesting area, will I return to the area after not finding the cache just to get the tick in the box, or do I just ditch it and move on to another area? Can't quite make up my mind. As I said this is a new development around here. Up to now they have been quite findable and not had a DNF.

 

But back to the topic, if the point of any cache is to get you to walk somewhere interesting, then logic would dictate that a micro does the job just as well.

 

But somehow opening a decent sized box and seeing what we have found has a certain thrill. Also, I get more pleasure from the cleverness of a well hidden full sizer than from a well hidden micro. I guess I 'm impressed by how a full sized cache can be hidden so near to people and they don't even know it's there.

[+What's Job]

We had that kick from micros set from a series this weekend- and they were all micros

 

It's starting to bore me- think we'll just subscribe to the site and go our own way

 

Think we'll just go on finding the many beautiful places that we have already done without getting involved with all this- that's what it's about to us

 

Over and out

 

What's Job

[+McDeHack]

I had a good day last saturday morning. I trained and tubed to Green Park Station with my 'Brompton' folding bike to do some of the royal parks caches. I found 15 out of the 19 that I set out to do. They were all Micros. It was great cycling through the parks finding the hiding places. I even met another geocacher from Spain. The Tupper box caches that once were placed in the park have long gone. But the Micros seem to stay much longer.

[+Team Ullium]

I'm talking about micros that are considerably smaller than a 35mm film pot. Bits of tubing 1/4 inch in diameter, and an inch or two long, for example. Inside is a tiny piece of paper, rolled up--that's the log. The possibilities for disguising and hiding such an object are endless.

........

Has this sort of thing been seen in the UK yet?

It certainly has...I can think of at least two cat identification barrels which have been used as micros and they are considerably smaller than a 35mm canister

 

In both instances they were justified as far as I was concerned...however I do agree with Pharisee in general

 

I have never been a fan of micro caches...but having said that if I saw a great location and the only solution was to resort to a micro I would...but only as a last resort.

[+Hi-Tek]

This debate has been raging all over the forums, and I'm not surprised to see that you have the same issue in the UK.  But there is a new, and more controversial development that is being seen more often in my neighborhood--nanocaches.

<snip>

Has this sort of thing been seen in the UK yet?

They most certainly have.

 

I was 1st finder on one recently and the container was 10mm x 13mm (0.4" x 0.5"). It was one of those magnetic flashing light ear ring thingies. I must admit it was a b*gg*r to find in the dark but I was very pleased with myself when I did.

 

It's not the sort of thing I'd like to hunt for regularly but, I think it's current location is pretty good, there's no real opportunity to place a 'proper' cache box on the site.

[Nediam]

With regards to the comments on "sneaky" hard to find caches, Geocaching.com recommend in their FAQ section that variety is very much encouraged. It would be a bit boring if everyone used medium sized ammo tins wrapped in plastic bags. I think that variety and ingenuity of cache containers adds to the game.

 

Some cache setters like to set very hard caches to test out peoples abilities, whereas other setters prefer to place easier to find caches.

 

Maybe people who use "sneaky" containers could place a note on the web page giving a hint that the cache will take a bit more searching to find it.

 

Another advantage of unusual containers is that they are less likely to be "muggled". If a cache is disguised as a rock or a log etc, a muggle is likely to interfere with it than a large, white tupperware container poking out from behind a tree.

 

Quote from the FAQ section on the "Getting Started" page at Geocaching.com:-

 

Are there any variations in the game?

 

YES! We strongly encourage it, actually. Geocaching is a game that constantly reinvents itself, and the rules are very flexible. If you have a new idea on how to place a cache, or a new game using GPS units, we'd love to hear about it.

[+Hi-Tek]

Quote from the FAQ section on the "Getting Started" page at Geocaching.com:-

 

Are there any variations in the game?

 

YES! We strongly encourage it, actually. Geocaching is a game that constantly reinvents itself, and the rules are very flexible. If you have a new idea on how to place a cache, or a new game using GPS units, we'd love to hear about it.

It seems the rules are only 'very' flexible 'some' of the time and particularly when it suits TPTB.

[+ANDYBUG&LADYBIRD]

We fully agree with ya Pharisee , even small caches can be a bit of a pain, we have 4 tb's to drop off and couldn't this weekend as all the caches we found apart from 1 were too small to put them in!

We do own a micro cache out there but that is only because the origional cache which was a regular got muggled.

On the whole micro's are ok, but not as much fun as a "normal cache"

[+thirtyfootscrew]

Well I think it takes all sorts, I generally prefer 'proper' caches with decent sized containers but micros have their place. I rarely trade items these days and I don't pick up many TBs so I don't need large containers to trade / drop.

 

Micros are perfect for urban / suburban caches (Simply Paul was right about Oxford) and with more and more being placed they are less likely to be muggled so I'm all for them.

 

The other benefit of micros and small caches placed along towpaths, etc. is that they can make a good route. I do 95% of my caching on foot so make a 6 - 12 mile walk out of a caching trip, micros enable more caches to be placed in busy areas so it means I have more to find on my route (usually a round trip).

[+jjn too]

The time has come to do the same with all these lame micros... They should only be listed if the setter can satisfy our reviewers that it’s not possible to place a proper cache, with goodies and a real logbook, at the chosen location.

I'd like to see micros under there own classification (in the same way as virtual/multicaches).

 

I find it frustrating when going to a new area & looking up nearby caches only to find that there are loadsa micros, but only realising when I get there.

 

Things have got better with the size indicator on the listing page - but I don't think it's reliable enough to exclude micros from a pocket query.

[+thirtyfootscrew]

I'd like to see micros under there own classification (in the same way as virtual/multicaches).

Yeah, I'm with that definitely - would make life a lot easier.

[+Lost in Space]

deleted

Edited March 15, 2005 by Lost in Space