[Az-Geocaching] Response to "The Finds" and "Virtuals"

--- J H/TEAM 360 wrote:
I know I am not the only one who likes
> to read historical signs at the side of freeways,
> and I find them a good lesson, as well as a "find".

I thought you didn't care about 'finds' anymore? :D

As I still go out caching, of course I care about the "finds". I just don't care about the numbers (stats). Big difference.

If GC.com is trying to
> free up server space by eliminating Virts, they
> should begin by deleting the 150+ pages of past
> forum discussions that no one references anyway.

Sounds like a number I posted recently ;)

Didn't know about that, because I don't follow numbers anymore. I guess great minds think alike, what can I say?

Seriously, while I don't mind virtuals WITH MERIT, the
game is geoCACHING (emphasis mine). The idea is to
find a hidden container and sign a logbook proving you
found it. Virtuals were designed to allow playing the
game at places that could not support a hidden
container, such as NPS land.

Virtuals were created as a new spin on the game, which GC.com SAYS it encourages, but really frowns upon behind the scenes.


With all of the unique micro-containers floating
around out there, it is hard to find a place that
could only have a true virtual cache. What's wrong
with hiding a logsheet/book at an interesting site
rather than having the finder email a picture or
codeword to you? Does it really take something away
from the experience?

No, it adds to it. Adds more geotrash, that is! Maybe I don't want to clutter up everyplace with yet another micro.

Do you really think the finder is
going to learn something more by not logging a book
and email you instead? I don't buy that one. I've
found a few virtuals and couldn't tell you what I
'learned' at any of them. I haven't had the desire to
find out more about why the monument or marker was
placed there. I imagine most other cachers are about
the same. =====FriarED

I have learned quite a bit about this great state of Arizona and its history by actually taking the time and reading some of those monuments. If you don't like them, hey then, just don't do them. No one is forcing you to, but don't take away the fun for those of us who DO like them. Plenty of mountaintop ones I don't like, either, but they don't bother me, I just move on down the list. Live and let live, my brother.

There are plenty of you who don't like virtuals. That is fine for you. But you are insisting virtuals be eliminated for those who enjoy doing them. That stinks. I think some virtuals have more merit than just another altoids tin or tupperware among another trashy area. I'm picky and I don't do every cache. Why can't those of you who hate virtuals leave them alone for the rest of us to enjoy?

Amen. Can I get an amen? Lemme hear ya!

I have a cache that I want to do this year similar to one I did last year involving the statues on Main street in Mesa. I have to incorporate a cache with it now. I think it degrades my cache. Now people will walk around, see the statues and have to drive a few miles away just to claim credit for it. I would have liked the option to keep it as a virtual cache.

Yet another example of being forced down by "The Man".

Yes, looking for the logbook... tearing up landscaping,
pulling down ivy, turning over rocks, tipping over a fountain
and looking at the bottom, just playing the game. Not pointing
fingers,
but these things happen.

And that's the TRUTH! Maybe GPSax CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search