Re: [Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!

Top Page
This message is part of the following thread:
Mthe complete thread tree sorted by date
M---\Jared Ross at <-
M++\Mnoshdoo tsoh at ->
Attachments:
Message as email
+ (text/plain)
+ (text/html)
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: noshdoo tsoh
Date:  
To: listserv
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!
“Trust me, just because there are more micros than rural caches, doesn't
mean they're more POPULAR.”



It’s not the number of caches that makes them popular, but the number of
finds on each cache. The fact that they are found at a rate exponentially
higher than other caches does indicate popularity. Or am I missing the
definition of ‘popular’? Back it up with numbers? ;-)



“We're trying to encourage good micros and urban caches and discourage the
placement of bad ones.”



A noble cause, indeed. Can I see you’re scientific study on what is good and
what is bad? You are the decider? Oh, that’s right, trust you.



Back to you’re regularly scheduled rant…





_____

From:
[mailto:az-geocaching-bounces@listserv.azgeocaching.com] On Behalf Of Jared
Ross
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 8:42 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!



Yeah, I knew that remark was coming. Trust me, just because there are more
micros than rural caches, doesn't mean they're more POPULAR. You conduct a
scientific study and then I'll believe that claim. Furthermore I do not
believe mine (nor AZcachemeister or ShadowAce's) comments were suggesting
that we discourage micros, just crappy ones. :) Honestly, there are hundreds
of great micros and urban hides out there. At the same time, there are
hundreds of horrible micros (apparently they're popular). We're trying to
encourage good micros and urban caches and discourage the placement of bad
ones.

As I mentioned we do our best to determine whether a cache is one that we
will enjoy or not before going after it, but this doesn't always work. Maybe
if I "complain" about it then the next guy with my tastes will know better.

Cache and let cache, and let me complain about crappy caches. ;)

Jared

----- Original Message ----
From: noshdoo tsoh <>
To:
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 7:57:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!

To no one in particular, and to whomever it applies:



Urban micros are a lot more popular than rural/desert/mountain caches. Just
because you personally don't like urban micro caches doesn't mean there
needs to be some sort of organized effort to discourage them. A lot of
people are visiting and enjoying these types of caches. Really, how hard can
it be to go after only the type of caches you enjoy, instead of going after
all of them, and then complaining about it later? You'll find duds no matter
what type of cache you go after. And of course, the whole thing's just a
game. Sounds like a few cachers may need a vacation from caching itself.



Your trash cache is another’s treasure cache.



Simple idea: Cache and let cache.





_____

From:
[mailto:az-geocaching-bounces@listserv.azgeocaching.com] On Behalf Of Regan
Smith
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 1:15 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!



I have a borrowed idea (360) don’t log it do you really need the find???
Regardless of what alphabet log you use a find on a cache validates it.



_____

From:
[mailto:az-geocaching-bounces@listserv.azgeocaching.com] On Behalf Of Jared
Ross
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 12:31 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!



WARNING: This is a regular sized email. If you're only a fan of micro emails
then ignore this email immediately.

I really agree with AZcachemeister and ShadowAce. At the same time
ShadowAce's comments have made me realize that I'm not doing much to help
the matter. I'm not very confrontational and I don't like to be very mean
and while I encourage someone with larger cohanes to log exactly how they
feel, I'm not really willing to do that. I have however decided to change my
logging standards. We've become a little more picky when it comes to caches
that we hunt. I'm not saying that we've sworn off micros or urban hides as
there are some out there that are nice. Basically if I'm planning a cache
outing I'll read over the cache description and if it seems suspect I might
skim through a few log entries. If it sounds like its behind a Home Depot
trash compactor then I'm going to take it off our list. Even with a
screening process we still end up doing caches that we would rather not have
done. Sure we could have ignored the cache, IF we would have known what we
were getting into. Admit it, once you're out of the car and searching, you
want to find it.

Yesterday I grabbed four urban caches. I also drove past about 2 or 3 others
but never even stopped because of the locations. Of those 4, I logged as
follows:

Cache #1 - It was a tricky cache container in a relatively pointless
location but it belongs to a series and overall it wasn't that bad. My log
entry noted the creativity of the cache and thanked the owner.

Cache #2 - A LPC cache located close to a main road and across from an
office building. Luckily I could block the traffic with my truck but the
container was too big and made the lamp skirt stick up on one side, making
it that much more obvious. My log entry said almost nothing, "yup, right
where it should have been" and instead of signing off the way I always do
"Thanks, Jared" I wrote "TN/LN, Jared". It's subtle, I know.

Cache #3 - A good cache with a significant location. The container was
nothing special and the technique was typical, but the location wasn't. My
log entry was long, very detailed (without spoilers) and included a Thank
You at the end.

Cache #4 - A creative, homemade container in a vagabonds paradise. There
were blankets and other things very nearby that indicate homeless people are
usually here. My log briefly mentioned the cache container being unique and
then I described the homeless persons new "shelter" nearby. I did not thank
the cache owners.

This morning I found another urban cache that while not in an especially
interesting spot, it was a well planned hide and well stocked, large, cache.
I also left a very long detailed log entry for this cache expressing my
enjoyment of finding it.

AZcachemeister is right that we need to find a way to increase the quality
of urban caches. Urban hides have a place in geocaching and allow for many
people to enjoy the game that might not be able to find the rural hides.
Helping each other make better decisions about what caches to go after is
one thing that we can do to help. While my way isn't blunt and to the point,
I'm trying to praise good caches by leaving detailed log entries and ignore
bad caches by not giving them the praise they DON'T deserve.

Another, more obvious way of making a difference is by hiding our own
caches. I'm not very good at this and often struggle to justify my cache
placements because I either think they aren't creative enough or I question
whether or not the location is good enough. From what I've seen lately
though I would rather find an altoids container in a park than find a well
disguised cache behind Wal-Mart.

Quickly, in regards to the concern about having your log entry deleted if
you leave negative feedback. You have a couple options.
1. You could keep logging the same message back to the cache every time it
is deleted making a note that it was deleted. If anyone is watching the
cache they'll become aware of the situation and maybe that will affect their
next cache placement.
2. You could log a seemingly innocent log entry and then a day or two later
edit that log entry and add back the comments in your original log that was
deleted. Owners aren't notified when a log entry is edited.
3. While this one is controversial some people do it. If your log entry is
repeatedly deleted then log a find on your own cache and specify that it is
a log entry for GCxxxxx and the reason you can't log it there followed by
your original log entry.

Anyone else have any ideas or comments on how we can improve the caches in
our state? Maybe we need a special acronym. Instead of TFTC we could have
DWYT (Don't Waste Your Time). Of course we could always start using this
website to generate log entries for us:
http://loungingatwalden.googlepages.com/RandomLog.html
My favorite generated log entry: "This cache was ill-conceived and
ill-received. You should turn your GPS over to the nearest authorities! TNLN
and almost didn't bother signing the log!!"

Jared of AZBliss02

----- Original Message ----
From: AZcachemeister <>
To:
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 9:17:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!

Well, I don't like to insult people by saying their cache is crap, but
aren't they insulting us by bringing us to those areas?
There is nothing of interest at the back of the 99¢ store, nor anything
clever about a shoe-polish can stuffed in a crack in the building.
If we don't start taking some responsibility for our activities, someone
else will.
If enough people start 'telling it like it is' then the cachers hiding those
type of caches just might get the hint.

_____



Regan Smith wrote:

Tftc



Tnlnsl



Honesty will get your log deleted…



_____

From:
[mailto:az-geocaching-bounces@listserv.azgeocaching.com] On Behalf Of
ShadowAce
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 6:15 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!



Scott,

With all due respect. Oct 25, 2005 4:02 PM you sent email about how Micros
were evil and now that you had finally reached the top find counter in the
state you were not going to be going for micros any longer. How only Urban
caches had any reason to exist and people should help stop the spread of
micro spew.

Yet a very large percent of your cache finds are micros even after the
posts about how Micros should go away. 1114 terrain 1 and 735 difficulty 1
according to the stats you placed on your profile. While I am sick of lamp
poles and guard rails myself, I merely pointed that story out because of how
many people caching in Arizona tell me at almost every single event
'Permission is not required' or 'Its public property'.

If cachers want to place a micro every 600 feet they will. If they throw
caches out with no intention of ever maintaining them, they will. Why?
Because every other cacher is writing 'Great cache, thanks for the hide' and
not writing....

I was able to grab this cache quickly though I had to shield the location
with my rear side from the dumpster divers. or After sifting through the
garbage left by the homeless in the area, we found your cache.

Never would have known about this place, because we generally avoid
dumpsters.

I have been trying to be very honest in my logs about areas such as these
and instead of getting 'Hay thanks for warning me that place was going to be
so terrible', I receive emails saying 'Why are you such an ass? If you dont
like the cache, dont go find it!'

Welp the problem with this is from the writeups you have no idea if it will
be a real interesting place such as the one we found last night called Hope,
or in a pile of trash until you get to the location.

So instead of complaining about the TYPE of cache, I was merely pointing
out that Permission should be obtained on ALL cache hides. Heck I spent 2
years getting permission for one place. 4 weeks to get permission for
another cache. 5 weeks of emails to get permission for one location and then
other people just throw more caches in the area when they came.. Yep I
caught hell from the person that granted me permission to place mine after
that.. Joy joy...

If people hate micros so much, why do they continue to grab them and write
'Thanks for the fun'?



On 2/9/07, Roping The Wind <> wrote:


The geocacher who placed the altoid tin says he "wished others had told him
this was not a good place to put a cache". I can only laugh at that
statement. The gc.com site clearly states that you must get permission to
place a cache on private property!!! Did he not read that little tidbit of
information? Typical of alot of urban cache hides. Is he now trying to put
it onto the geocaching community as a whole? Making the whole game/community

look bad?

I do agree though that law enforcement over reacted... kinda like the little
Boston cartoon 'bomb' scare thing.

The other thing that comes to my mind is that he is relatively new to the
game and this is most of what he has seen so far... a bunch of altoid tins
behind stores and on electrical boxes and the like. So, he might have
thought it was totally ok to hide a cache like this... even though, as I
mentioned before, he should have gotten permission to place it in the first
place.

I do like this quote though: "I've discovered that I really don't like urban
caching. I'd rather do it in the woods. That's where it's really fun," he
said.

As of the past month and a half now, I have not found an urban cache hide. I
dont mind going a week without finding a cache anymore. But I have decided
that I only want to do rural area caches. Caches that require a hike to get
to or maybe a nice 4x4 drive or maybe just a drive by cache placed in a
beautiful location way outside the city limit signs. Or maybe caches placed
in small towns is ok too. Basically, caches placed with the location in
mind. I have been using the DGP geocaching site lately to pick and choose
caches to find.

The past month or so, I have found a much greater enjoyement for the game
again. It feels like the old days of caching 4 or 5 years ago when I first
began. I can't say I will never find an urban cache again. But I am
carefully picking and choosing which ones I want to find.

Scott
Team Ropingthewind

_________________________________________________________________
Laugh, share and connect with Windows Live Messenger
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://ima
gine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us
<http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://im
agine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline>
&source=hmtagline

____________________________________________________________
Az-Geocaching mailing list
To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching

Arizona 's Geocaching Resource
http://www.azgeocaching.com











_____
















____________________________________________________________









Az-Geocaching mailing list









To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:









http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching



















Arizona 's Geocaching Resource









http://www.azgeocaching.com











____________________________________________________________
Az-Geocaching mailing list
To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching

Arizona 's Geocaching Resource
http://www.azgeocaching.com





_____

Don't pick lemons.
See all the new 2007 cars
<http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html;_ylc=X3oDMTE0OGRsc3F2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2B
HNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDbmV3Y2Fycw--> at Yahoo! Autos.
<http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html;_ylc=X3oDMTE0OGRsc3F2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2B
HNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDbmV3Y2Fycw-->

____________________________________________________________
Az-Geocaching mailing list
To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching

Arizona's Geocaching Resource
http://www.azgeocaching.com





_____

No need to miss a message. Get
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=43910/*http:/mobile.yahoo.com/mail%0a> email
on-the-go
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=43910/*http:/mobile.yahoo.com/mail%0a> started.

This message was posted to the following mailing lists:
AzGeocaching.com
Mailing List Info | Nearby Messages		<-Re: [Az-Geocaching] Check this video out: "Bikini Thief"Re: [Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!->
AzGeocaching administrated by AdminLurker (version 2.3)