[Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!

Sun Feb 11 00:55:26 MST 2007

Clearly I've missed the mark on this one and then had the audacity to argue with the king of statistics, Mr. DSW himself. Either way, apparently this wasn't the direction that ShadowAce was referring to. I'll save my comments for future discussions. I sometimes wonder how we can have such ridiculously different opinions, and then I remember that we have politicians that can't even agree. I wonder if anyone has ever been arrested while finding a rural cache???

Jared

----- Original Message ----
From: noshdoo tsoh <geocaching at deepsouthwest.com>
To: listserv at azgeocaching.com
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 10:33:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Only an altoids tin!!

<!--

_filtered {font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
_filtered {
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
_filtered {font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
_filtered {
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}

 _filtered {font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
 p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
	{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.emailstyle18
	{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
span.emailstyle19
	{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
span.emailstyle21
	{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle22
	{
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
 _filtered {
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
	{}
-->

“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:
az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com
[mailto:az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com] On Behalf Of Jared Ross

Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007
8:42 PM

To: listserv at azgeocaching.com

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 < geocaching at deepsouthwest.com >

To: listserv at azgeocaching.com

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:
az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com
[mailto:az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com] On Behalf Of Regan Smith

Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007
1:15 PM

To: listserv at azgeocaching.com

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:
az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com
[mailto:az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com] On Behalf Of Jared Ross

Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007
12:31 PM

To: listserv at azgeocaching.com

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 <azcachemeister at getnet.com>

To: listserv at azgeocaching.com

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: az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com
[mailto:az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com] On Behalf Of ShadowAce

Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007
6:15 PM

To: listserv at azgeocaching.com

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 <arizcowboy at hotmail.com>
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://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline

____________________________________________________________ 

Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv at 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

____________________________________________________________

Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv at 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

____________________________________________________________

Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv at 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

Don't pick lemons.

See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.

____________________________________________________________

Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv at 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

No need to miss a message. Get
email on-the-go 

with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile .
Get
started.

____________________________________________________________
Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv at 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

____________________________________________________________________________________
It's here! Your new message!  
Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/pipermail/az-geocaching/attachments/20070210/7fc79cdf/attachment.htm 