A Question On Virtuals

[mufasa1023]

So what I've basically garnered from my readings is that virtuals are near impossible to get approved anymore, is this correct? I have seen sparse writings on what factors would improve a virtuals getting approved, one being that it shouldnt interfere with a physical cache's getting listed within the .1 mile rule and the other that it should have some 'wow' factor to it.

 

I want to place a virtual cache in a city 100 miles from home, in the city where I go to school. Its in a building that has very few places (if any) to place a physical cache within .1 miles and would not be wise to do so anyhow b/c it is a government building. The building has a very cool thing in it for adults and has a child oriented museum in it as well. It definitley wowed me for what its worth. The people who run the building are all very friendly and love visitors.

 

The only things that I could forsee that would prevent its being listed are that its 1. a government building 2. you have to go through metal detectors to get there 3. no log book just questions to answer 4 it's indoors

 

i would like to know if it's worth my time to set up a cache like this? Have I missed some hard guidelines to placing a virtual? Are my listed problems insurmountable to getting the virtual placed? Should i just submit it and let the reviewer decide?

 

If i cannot place this as a virtual I would like to place it as a physical cache but I live 100 miles away and might not be able to keep up maintinence.

[+M-T-P]

Place it! What you describe is what a virtual "should" be in my opinion. There is one virtual near my home where all you have to do is count the planks on a stupid foot bridge in a park. There isn't a view, there isn't any historical significance, its just a bridge in a park.

[+TetrAmigos]

Yeah, that can be a tough pill to swallow. Personally, I prefer to see virtuals with some historical or physical characteristics that make it extraordinary when compared to park-and-grabs.

 

Go for it, and be detailed in your cache description!

[+sbell111]

Contact your local approver to see what it will take (if anything) to get him to approve. Then jump through the hoops!

[+Wander Lost]

From what you describe this sounds like a cool spot but it would not be listed under current guidelines. The first reason I can think of is that it wouldn't require the use of a gps. Anyone could look at the map figure out what building it was and leave the gps at home.

 

Now if you could find a way to hide and maintain a physical then you could use questions from the virtual subject to find the correct coordinates for the off-site container. I personally prefer this type to a standard virtual, I get to see something cool and I get to find a box.

[+StarBrand]

Lets see....hmmmmm

 

Government building + Metal Detector + indoors + (I'll assume) limited hours

 

hmmmmm

 

Do you have to pay for parking too??

 

I am failing to see much of a wow factor - (at least for geocachers [as a group]).

 

Having said that - submit it and see what happens!!! The worse they could do is say no after all.

[+sbell111]

From what you describe this sounds like a cool spot but it would not be listed under current guidelines. The first reason I can think of is that it wouldn't require the use of a gps. Anyone could look at the map figure out what building it was and leave the gps at home. ...

I've seen plenty of caches indoors. Typically, you use your GPSr to find the correct entrance and then follow clues to get to the cache.

 

These can be very fun.

 

Besides, anyone can look at a tope and find any cache without a GPSr.

[+sbell111]

Government building + Metal Detector + indoors + (I'll assume) limited hours...

 

Do you have to pay for parking too??...

I don't see the fact that the building is owned bny the government, in and of itself, being a problem. We're in and out of government-owned places all day long. Some of them are pretty cool.

 

I don't have problems with metal detectors. They are part of our lives now.

 

Indoors: See my post above.

 

Many caches have limited hours. Make sure that you mention this in the cache description.

 

No one has to pay for parking. Ever. Find a nice, free place to park. Enjoy your nice walk. That's what geocaching is all about, after all.

[Keystone]

sbell, you're mixing apples (physical caches) and oranges (virtual caches). The guidelines for virtual caches are quite specific, and differ in many respects from those governing physical caches. Yes, I can go out and find a physical cache in the woods without a GPS. The only requirement applicable is that the hider must use a GPS to obtain accurate coordinates. How I find it is up to me.

 

In contrast, the virtual cache listing guidelines say that the target must be a "a specific distinct GPS target" -- in other words, something that I need to use my GPS receiver to find. Not a scenic overlook of "a nice view" within a national park, but a one-of-a-kind historic object within a national park. Not the coordinates for the entrance of a museum and then leave the GPS in the car while I wander around the museum finding the virtual cache target. That's different than a physical cache hidden with permission inside the museum, whose location is derived from solving a puzzle or following clues after using my GPS to get to the front door. Yes, it's a bit of a double standard. The site favors physical caches, so deal with the distinction for the very short period of time remaining for virtual caches to be submitted.

[Keystone]

Have I missed some hard guidelines to placing a virtual?  Are my listed problems insurmountable to getting the virtual placed?

 

Yes.

 

If i cannot place this as a virtual I would like to place it as a physical cache but I live 100 miles away and might not be able to keep up maintinence.

 

Oops.

Edited March 31, 2005 by Keystone Approver

[+sbell111]

sbell, you're mixing apples (physical caches) and oranges (virtual caches). ...

Thanks for catching my mistake. Like most people, I suppose, I have trouble keeping the guidelines in my head sometimes. That's why my initial advice was:

Contact your local approver to see what it will take (if anything) to get him to approve. Then jump through the hoops!

[+Moose Mob]

I like virtuals. I like them a lot. I mostly like the historical markers off the beaten path while I am on a road trip.

 

While on a road trip, I normally ignore multi's because I never know if it's 100 feet away or 20 miles behind me. On NPS property, it will likely take you out of the park at an entracne point too far from your planned route. There are usually 300 other caches in the area that I can get. I ignore mysteries because I am not going to solve a cryptic puzzle while driving down the highway.

 

By all means make it a micro. If that is not practical, alllow the virtual. More folks will enjoy it that way.

 

[/soap box]

[HIPS-meister]

I also like virtuals, and would like to see the guidelines that have been placed against them relaxed again. The reason why I say that is: "I like for a cache to take me to an interesting place, where something historical happened." In many of those places, a traditional cache can't be used. Virtuals can.

 

In my humble, if the site merits a cache, then it merits the appropriate type of cache for that site; whatever type that may be. However, an arbitrary restriction against a type of cache has the undesirable property of eliminating caches, altogether in many deserving locations. Oops.

 

For instance... there is a national battlefield near my home coords. Right now there is one (virtual) cache there. I could easily see, perhaps a "virtual multi-cache tour" being set up by history-buffs to introduce fellow geocachers to the history within the various units of this park. No other type of cache could legally be used. Many geocachers would however enjoy the tour. The sport of geocaching could educate a lot of people that way.

 

"Numbers" don't mean squat to me. Faced with a list of caches in an area I am very selective. Otherwise, I could be found leaning against a lamppost, fast asleep from sheer boredom. But that's me.

 

This is an issue that I think needs to be tossed around a little more. Where should the defining line be moved to, and why? Let's think it.

Edited April 1, 2005 by HIPS-meister

[+Mopar]

This is an issue that I think needs to be tossed around a little more. Where should the defining line be moved to, and why? Let's think it.

WHY?

 

It's been mentioned plenty of times; there is a redesign of virtuals and locationless caches coming online in the very near future. Why keep tossing stuff around that is going to be totally irrelevant in a few months?

[+Moose Mob]

<snip>It's been mentioned plenty of times; there is a redesign of virtuals and locationless caches coming online in the very near future. Why keep tossing stuff around that is going to be totally irrelevant in a few months?

I would like to see that redesign. If my virtuals, locationless (and earthcahes?) finds were all moved to another related site, I would have no problems. Having absolutly no inside information on how/what the intentions, scopes or philosophy is, it only leaves one to wonder.

 

In a few moths? It seems you have some inside information. Not being skeptical since there have been great strides taken on this site, but at least a PR announcement with a scope or concept to whetten our appitites would be great.

[+BigHank]

I like virtuals that take me to some historic spot I probably wouldn't have stumbled upon by myself, virtuals that point out some odd footnote to history (did a great one of those, today) or that take me to some really interesting spot. I have, in many threads on this topic, given my opinion as "wait, soon there will be a new virtual/locationless solution," and I suport TPTB in their efforts to set that up. I just think if TPTB can't get the long awaited new virtual stuff going soon , maybe they ought to loosen up the current strictures on the guidelines a bit until they do.

[Keystone]

<snip>It's been mentioned plenty of times; there is a redesign of virtuals and locationless caches coming online in the very near future. Why keep tossing stuff around that is going to be totally irrelevant in a few months?

I would like to see that redesign. If my virtuals, locationless (and earthcahes?) finds were all moved to another related site, I would have no problems. Having absolutly no inside information on how/what the intentions, scopes or philosophy is, it only leaves one to wonder.

 

In a few moths? It seems you have some inside information. Not being skeptical since there have been great strides taken on this site, but at least a PR announcement with a scope or concept to whetten our appitites would be great.

It's not inside information when it's talked about publicly in the forums. I just did a search and found about 10 posts by Jeremy in 2005 that mention the ongoing work on introducing the new game to replace virtual and locationless caches. It was just ten days ago when he posted the timeframe estimate which formed the basis for Mopar's post.

 

So, patience. Wait for the new game. I think you'll like it!

[+Renegade Knight]

Contact your local approver to see what it will take (if anything) to get him to approve. Then jump through the hoops!

Exactly.

 

As much as we in the forums like to give opinions, we are just the peanut gallery and the real decision making power lies with your approver.

[+Hemlock]

As much as we in the forums like to give opinions, we are just the peanut gallery

I'm glad you know your place, RK!

 

Just kidding. Don't flame me

[+Moose Mob]

<snip>It's been mentioned plenty of times; there is a redesign of virtuals and locationless caches coming online in the very near future. Why keep tossing stuff around that is going to be totally irrelevant in a few months?

I would like to see that redesign. If my virtuals, locationless (and earthcahes?) finds were all moved to another related site, I would have no problems. Having absolutly no inside information on how/what the intentions, scopes or philosophy is, it only leaves one to wonder.

 

In a few moths? It seems you have some inside information. Not being skeptical since there have been great strides taken on this site, but at least a PR announcement with a scope or concept to whetten our appitites would be great.

It's not inside information when it's talked about publicly in the forums. I just did a search and found about 10 posts by Jeremy in 2005 that mention the ongoing work on introducing the new game to replace virtual and locationless caches. It was just ten days ago when he posted the timeframe estimate which formed the basis for Mopar's post.

 

So, patience. Wait for the new game. I think you'll like it!

My apologies. It was not my intention to flame, and in retrospect, it appears I may have given that impression.

 

I did check the Website announcements and do keep one eye on the forums, but I did not do a search to find Jeremy's comment 10 days ago in the thread regarding locationless caches. (I don't pay a lot of attention to locationless). Not to sound impatient, because in reality I am, but there have been many comments over the past year that "great and wondeful things" are coming down the road with Virtuals and Locationless caches. I do hope they are moved off to an entity of thier own and thus do not compete for space with the traditional caches. It is my hope that this is what happens, but there are other ideas also.

 

Sorry if I offended anyone. Curiosity got the best of me.

[PyroDave]

<snip>It's been mentioned plenty of times; there is a redesign of virtuals and locationless caches coming online in the very near future. Why keep tossing stuff around that is going to be totally irrelevant in a few months?

I would like to see that redesign. If my virtuals, locationless (and earthcahes?) finds were all moved to another related site, I would have no problems. Having absolutly no inside information on how/what the intentions, scopes or philosophy is, it only leaves one to wonder.

 

In a few moths? It seems you have some inside information. Not being skeptical since there have been great strides taken on this site, but at least a PR announcement with a scope or concept to whetten our appitites would be great.

It's not inside information when it's talked about publicly in the forums. I just did a search and found about 10 posts by Jeremy in 2005 that mention the ongoing work on introducing the new game to replace virtual and locationless caches. It was just ten days ago when he posted the timeframe estimate which formed the basis for Mopar's post.

 

So, patience. Wait for the new game. I think you'll like it!

Can you markwell the time line post plz.

[Keystone]

I can state based on firsthand knowledge that programming work on the new game has been underway for most of the past year. I have seen the programmer(s) chained at their cubicles, and Jeremy cracking the whip saying "code faster! code faster!"

 

As for the concept, it's been in the mind of the Evil Genius for much longer than that. The vision was first unveiled to me while hiking with Jeremy in fall of 2003. Dude, it was like the Virgin Mary appearing at Lourdes. Well, except that Jeremy's neither a virgin nor a female, and we were in the Seattle area, not in France. But other than that, it was pretty darn close.

 

Is Lourdes a virt?

[+Moose Mob]

<snip>Is Lourdes a virt?

There's a couple references in Europe, but I could not read the local language. If neither one are the right place, then give it a month or two.

 

Edit: add research

Edited April 1, 2005 by Moose Mob

[PyroDave]

I can state based on firsthand knowledge that programming work on the new game has been underway for most of the past year. I have seen the programmer(s) chained at their cubicles, and Jeremy cracking the whip saying "code faster! code faster!"

 

As for the concept, it's been in the mind of the Evil Genius for much longer than that. The vision was first unveiled to me while hiking with Jeremy in fall of 2003. Dude, it was like the Virgin Mary appearing at Lourdes. Well, except that Jeremy's neither a virgin nor a female, and we were in the Seattle area, not in France. But other than that, it was pretty darn close.

 

Is Lourdes a virt?

Tell them the beattings will continue till the morale inproves around there. Also tell Jeremy to use his whole arm while whiping them you dont want to come down with carpel tunnel.

[+Cardinal Red]

PyroDave Posted on Mar 31 2005, 11:27 PM

Can you markwell the time line post plz.

Jeremy's Timeline Posts - Read the two Posts above this one also

[mufasa1023]

1. A virtual cache must be a unique physical object that can be referenced through latitude and longitude coordinates. That object should be semi-permanent to permanent. If I post the cache today, someone else should be able to find it tomorrow and the next day.

 

The buildings entrance can be an exact cord is that sufficient? The building is quite permanent.

 

A cache has to be a specific distinct GPS target - not something large like a mountain top or a park, however special those locations are.

 

ok so its a large building but what if the object was to get your picture taken in a specific place in the building?

 

2. A virtual cache must be novel, of interest to other players, and have a special historic, community or geocaching quality that sets it apart from everyday subjects. Since the reward for a virtual cache is the location, the location should “WOW” the prospective finder. Signs, memorials, tombstones, statues or historical markers are among the items that are generally too common to qualify as virtual caches. Unusual landmarks or items that would be in a coffee table book are good examples. If you don't know if it is appropriate, contact your local reviewer first, or post a question to the forums about your idea.

 

There are only 51 of these in the country, and it sure does have a wow factor.

 

3. There should be one or more questions about an item at a location, something seen at that location, etc., that only the visitor to that physical location will be able to answer. The questions should be difficult enough that it cannot be answered through library or web research. The use of a "certificate of achievement" or similar item is not a substitute for the find verification requirement.

 

The childrens museum has many many questions that can be asked of it and so does the rest of the building.

 

An original photo posted to the cache log can be an acceptable way to verify a find, or an email to the owner with valid answers for the question or questions. In NO cases should answers be posted in the logs, even if encrypted.

 

There are two amazing places to take a picture in this building, or as a substitute answers from the museum.

 

“why couldn’t a microcache or multi-cache be placed there?” Physical caches have priority, so please consider adding a micro or making the location a step in an offset or multi-stage cache with the physical cache placed in an area that is appropriate.

 

It's a government building with security concerns. And the point of making it a virtual is to highlight it's signifigance, to make it a mere 'step' on the way to a keyholder seems to be an insult to the magnificence of the location.

 

Parking is free in the buildings own parking lot but it is in a downtown area that has parking meters

[mufasa1023]

how do i find a local approver?

[Keystone]

If you didn't like the answer you heard from me, you could write to the Michigan-based volunteer cache reviewer who listed your other cache this week. His name is at the bottom of your cache page. Then you can hear the same thing from someone who lives nearby you.

[+carleenp]

Why don't you use things in the building for people to get information off of and add to some numbers to form coordinates for a physical cache in a park. The park doesn't even have to be all that close (but it would be nice if it was). Then you assure that people wander around the building and they also get a physical cache. That normally is not difficult to set up, solves the problem, and really is the best of both worlds.

[+AtoZ]

Well with what KA sayed it may be a mute point and I guess I can wait for the NEW GAME. But what I have wondered is what defines a "WOW" factor. It seems like it can or is VERY subjective. I mean like what is a WOW factor???? What is WOW to me may be totally boring to you. I mean can you get excited looking at a Commadore 64, or a statue of some Hockey player, yes and no.

But if what KA says there is a new game afoot then I am excited to see that thought I hope it will prevent looking for a pair of tenns shoe hanging from a power line, unless it is like a size 16EEEEE or something like that which would be funny.

Cheers

[+wekivahunters]

Recently, we tried to place a virtual cache at what we felt was an extremely unique location. The reviewer said no. I agree that the WOW factor is different for everyone, but I've seen some really bad physical caches that shouldn't be active. You should definately post your cache.

[+Tharagleb]

This is an issue that I think needs to be tossed around a little more.  Where should the defining line be moved to, and why?  Let's think it.

WHY?

 

It's been mentioned plenty of times; there is a redesign of virtuals and locationless caches coming online in the very near future. Why keep tossing stuff around that is going to be totally irrelevant in a few months?

Excellent point, and my sentiments exactly. Patience people...

[+Team GPSaxophone]

how do i find a local approver?

Send me $100 and I'll forward the contact information to you

[+Hemlock]

Oops. It looks like you sent the $ to me instead. Thanks!

 

mufasa1023, your local reviewer is Rusty.

[+Team Cotati]

Place it! What you describe is what a virtual "should" be in my opinion. There is one virtual near my home where all you have to do is count the planks on a stupid foot bridge in a park. There isn't a view, there isn't any historical significance, its just a bridge in a park.

Would you mind posting the waypoint name for this? Thanks.

[+Mopar]

Place it!  What you describe is what a virtual "should" be in my opinion.  There is one virtual near my home where all you have to do is count the planks on a stupid foot bridge in a park.  There isn't a view, there isn't any historical significance, its just a bridge in a park.

Would you mind posting the waypoint name for this? Thanks.

There are lots of old virts like that that would never get approved now. The fact that there are so many "lame" ones like that probably factors quite heavily into the current virtual cache guidelines.

[+Hard Oiler]

My Favorite Virtual is unique, in a government building, the GPSr gets you to the door and you then need poetry to get you to the location and when you get there you find something unique (doubt that there is another like this anywhere in the world).

 

I would hope that even under today's guidelines a virtual like this would get approved.

[+Team Cotati]

Place it!  What you describe is what a virtual "should" be in my opinion.  There is one virtual near my home where all you have to do is count the planks on a stupid foot bridge in a park.  There isn't a view, there isn't any historical significance, its just a bridge in a park.

Would you mind posting the waypoint name for this? Thanks.

There are lots of old virts like that that would never get approved now. The fact that there are so many "lame" ones like that probably factors quite heavily into the current virtual cache guidelines.

Boy, that is really an odd waypoint name.

[+Zekester & Simon]

We are relatively new to geocaching, been at it a month or so, but are veteran letterboxers. We explored a few possibilities for posting last night, but clearly, now having read the guidelines and this thread, they are unlikely to qualify. We've only done a few virtuals, and it is clear to us, having read this thread and the guidelines, that only one of those, "Work of Art" at GCD25E would qualify under the present guidelines.

 

The concept of "unique", "wow factor" etc are entirely subjective and hardly quantifiable. Our first virtual turned out to be a war memorial. If you chase down a virtual and end up at a war memorial and are not "wowed" by that it is our opinion that there is something wrong with you. Someone gave their life to preserve your freedoms, whether you think they were noble to have done so or stupid to have done so, there certainly is a "wow" in there either way. Point is, it is subjective.

 

For us, the joy is in the find, and we have yet to find a physical cache that has had anything but dollar store crap in it. We have not taken anything to keep from a physical cache because there has been nothing of interest. We really enjoy clever hides.

 

We really enjoy travel bugs, especially one's with goals, and we go out of our way to find them.

 

BUT IT IS ALL SUBJECTIVE!!!

 

From the rules: "Note: Physical caches are the basis of the activity. Virtual caches were created due to the inaccessibility of caching in areas that discourage it. Please keep in mind physical caches are the prime goal when submitting your cache report." Why is it that physical caches have to be the basis of the activity? We think that the true basis of the activity is successful use of a GPS receiver to navigate to a given point on the planet. That you can find the same exact spot where someone was before and guided you to solely by coordinates is where the "wow" factor rely lives. That, in and of itself is the ultimate reward of this hobby.

 

But, of course, that is just subjective.

 

We don't need to be geocachers to to go explore the historical sites in our area. We can find them through a little research at the library or on the web. But why prevent that from being combined? We certainly don't need to spend an hour and a half in the woods to find a can full of junk. But why prevent that? Choose to find the type of caches that you enjoy the most, and be prepared to be disappointed. Is it really any more disappointing to end up at the site where Sherman surrendered than it is to end up two miles down a muddy/icy trail peering into a can of 20th century detritus?

 

Freedom of choice brings responsibilty, which requires a certain amount of maturity to handle. People bring their interests to the hobby and participate in the manner that they choose. When more restrictions are placed, there are less choices.

 

It is our hope that the new system/rules/whatever does not force us to use another website to track things. That would be incredibly inconvenient. We also hope that the rules for what "qualifies" as a virtual cache are loosened back up.

 

v/r

 

Zekester & Simon

[Keystone]

Zekester & Simon,

 

Hello and welcome to geocaching. I think you'll very much enjoy the new game being developed. It will coexist very nicely next to finding geocaches, much like benchmarks do. In the meantime there is a definite slant in favor of geocaches, and that is just the way it is at this listing site. Stay tuned!