[GeoStL] Re: Frustration in picking caches

Ya  Think??  ;+)

We might not be the most prolific cachers, but I do read a LOT and know better 
than  to go to the forums and start or even join in on most conversations 
there. Some of the forum regulars appear to live for fresh meat.  I do read the 
forums and pick up all the interesting "gossip" and changes..  but to really 
join in ..  no way.  

Did you get "markwelled" with a topic like rating systems? Theoretically, there 
IS a rating system somewhere.  There's a link from the SLAGA site I believe.   
The problem I'm running into for a vacation is that while a 1.5 - 2 terrain 
that includes a 4 mile "walk"  might be doable here, it's probably not a wise 
choice for US on vacation -- unless there's a great payoff at the end.  I'm not 
finding a ton of those -- with a payoff. 

And, Bernie's PQ suggestion ..  well ..that could eliminate some nice caches 
that may or may not fit into our vacation plans. And, without a nice 
description it would appear that even a "less than 1" rating means something 
different in some areas than here.  I looked at one that was a 1 rating and 
pictures people posted showed a rocky unpaved minimountain with captions like 
"Whew..  tough hill without a path" "did this one after a rain and slid 30 feet 
into a creek"   It's very possible that the cache placers in that  area not as 
big of wimps as I am lol.   I've run across  quite a few grandfathered caches 
that were placed by people visiting on vacation. Geostandards have changed a 
bit in 4-5 years too.

I've concluded that in this area we're better at describing the terrain with 
one-legged pregnant cachers in mind.  

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: know_future@xxxxxxxx 
  To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 6:48 AM
  Subject: [GeoStL] Re: Frustration in picking caches


  Here's an idea. Go to the forums on GC.com and start talking about how you'd 
like to see a rating system on geocaches. I did this about a year ago and 
almost got my throat slit. Unless things have changed since then, everybody in 
there seems to think that we're all out to screw each other and a rating system 
would be a great place to accomplish that goal. I still think it's a good idea.



  -- \"tklnhl & kyd\"  wrote:


  I'm typing my frustration out loud here...

   I'm trying to map out caches to do on our vacation to Mt. Rushmore/South 
Dakota/Devil's Tower  and it's a bit frustrating. It appears that the cache 
placers there aren't as well trained as they are here.  I've found several 
caches of a terrain of 1.5 - 2 with a "simple" description and I think ... "We 
should be able to do this" -- keeping in mind that our group consists of  have 
a 7 year old who is oh so tired of  micros; an impatient male  who thinks drive 
and sleep, drive and sleep is an IDEAL way to spend a vacation, and myself -- 
whose prescription orthotics were recently eaten by the dog..  ...Then..  30 
logs in I read "Hot day to make this uphill 3 mile walk"  or  "first mile OK..  
loose rocks,  boulders and rattlesnakes at the end made this one a bit more 
challenging than I would have thought."   

  It would certainly be nice to have a note somewhere in the description that 
says, "Even, flat terrain on this 4 mile round trip hunt for a micro that has 
been stolen twice already."


  Also -- I'm not seeing any familiar names on logs from Omaha to Mt. 
Rushmore..  or I'm totally missing them..  anyone cached Omaha?

  Nancy

Other related posts: