Great post, Dan.
Along those lines (loosely), here's my .02 or so... Early on in caching
(that whole 4.5 years ago thing), there weren't a lot of participants.
Perhaps it was more cost prohibitive at that point in time, but many people
didn't know about GPS technology in a viable sense, and it just wasn't
popular in a greater sense. Cache hiders then weren't thinking much in the
way of urban caches, associating Geocaching more with hikes and awesome
scenery to take one through on the way to their hide. I stumbled across
caching after a Fox10 news story on it, and have been hooked ever since.
Was my first cache urban? Yes. It was at the Gilbert Riparian Preserve,
and I loved it. The proliferation of caches has been due to what I believe
to be a huge influx of family-oriented cachers, preferring time with their
kids on the hunts, as opposed to solitary time on a hike by oneself or with
perhaps another. I also believe that some of it had to do with a certain
degree of laziness, in which urban became the favorite over the rural. Some
just wanted to participate and get a find out there for people. That began
to happen so much, that one could almost score a half-dozen finds by simply
walking across a Walmart parking lot and checking random light poles. I'll
still grab a find on those if I'm nearby, because to me it at least shows
the owner that their effort was appreciated by my logging a find on their
cache. Could it also justify the 'lame urban cache' model? Of course.
It baffles me that there is such a level of complaining about cache A vs.
cache B when we are all free to make choices. For those of us who pay the
$3/month or $30/year to support the efforts of Geocaching.com, Pocket
Queries can be run that will filter out certain caches one would rather NOT
see. For the rest who don't, the choices are still there, but it's a little
more keyboard work to widdle out what you don't want to see or hunt. Don't
like virtuals? Ok, don't seek them out. Don't like 'lame urban micros'?
Ok, don't seek them out. If it's a numbers game, and you can't stand
driving by that one 'lame urban micro' 15 times a week, keep the complaints
to yourself, and log the find to feed the obsession. Logging the find and
then complaining about it anymore amounts to hypocrisy to me. If the
concept has become stale with you, then ignore it and continue to drive by
the LUM and mutter to yourself how lame it is. The irony there amuses me.
As Dan eluded to, cachers in say NY, CA, AZ, MT, TX, FL or wherever are no
better than one another in terms of what we are all capable of, or with what
caches we can find/hide. The only difference is geographical, and perhaps
philosophically. But neither of those differences puts one group over
another. I think that human nature has created its own problem here, one of
downright selfishness. We all want what we want, with little regard for
what others want. It won't be right until we have it OUR way. With so many
'our ways', such a reality is impossible, yet we choose to ignore this and
favor in-fighting and bickering, or internalized complaints that do nobody
any good.
"In time, all caches will devolve and entropy will be achieved."
-Steve Gross of Team Tierra Buena
I seem to recall a slight sense of embarassment at this comment being so
prominent on the azgc.com front page, but it's sad how true it is. Caches
in a sense have devolved, at least with concepts such as LUMs, but they
still all have their place. But I think the true message in that comment is
that entropy itself will be achieved by what is going on in regards to the
fighting/bickering/ridiculing of certain cache concepts and obvious
splitting among a community that still seems to be somewhat closely knit.
Cachers in other areas may/may not be complaining about the same things, but
if we all continue to allow this bickering, caching will ultimately destroy
itself, save for a few diehards who remain active, until even their flame is
extinguished by what caching has become. Letterboxing has been around for
155+ years, so why couldn't caching be as well? Decide which caches you
will seek, and do them. Forget about what else is out there, if it isn't
what you want to do. I may be one of the few who truly understands and
appreciates what Geocaching.com is doing with maintaining policy on caches.
I may not like some fo the policies, but I fully understand their reasons
for doing so. It's to try and ensure that caching will remain for me, and
everyone else out there who wants to. There can't be a separate policy by
region either, because that would only accelerate the death of caching as
groups begin to fight among themselves over which policies one area has over
another.
Brian
Team A.I.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Koch, Dan" <
Dan.Koch@Eclipsys.com>
To: <
listserv@azgeocaching.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 9:10 AM
Subject: RE: [Az-Geocaching] Mo' bettah caches!
> Land managers can, do and should monitor caches in other areas so that
> they
> know what they might expect to see in their area. If your neighbors'
> houses
> were getting broken into, would you leave your doors and windows open?
>
> It's unrealistic to believe that cachers are somehow more
> responsible/environmentally sensitive/etc in one area than another.
> Caches,
> and cachers, don't miraculously change when they cross state lines...or
> regions...or countries.
>
>
> In my opinion, we've gotten spoiled by having the azgeocaching.com site.
> Sure, it's given us all a bit of state pride and the competition can be
> fun
> (if you're in it for the numbers ;), but at the same time, it emphasizes
> the
> unrealistic idea that caches (and cachers) here in AZ are somehow
> different/more important/better than other caches (and cachers) out there.
>
> Just my two cents...Your mileage may vary...Yadda, yadda, yadda...
>
> LazyK - Dan
>
> "...logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs
> of
> the few" - ???
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: az-geocaching-bounces@listserv.azgeocaching.com
> To: listserv@azgeocaching.com; Artemis Approver
> Sent: 3/8/2005 4:11 AM
> Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Mo' bettah caches!
>
> See now this is what bugs us. We are penalized in this state because of
> what may happen in other states. This is why some think we need to have
> local control rather than one global place with sole control. I realize
> gc.com is looking out for everyone's best interest, by restricting
> things for us here, to avoid offending land managers in other states.
>
> <snip>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv@azgeocaching.com
> To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
> http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
>
> Arizona's Geocaching Resource
> http://www.azgeocaching.com
>
(text/plain)