[GeoStL] Re: ????????????Cache types?????????????????
- From: john leenerts <johnnybgood1@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:21:53 -0700 (PDT)
"Stephens Lake" an oldie on Columbia , Mo comes to mind. It was a single
stage that changed to a multi but is listed as a single stage. It is
technically a multi. It's one of the oldest in Missouri so I'm sure the owner
did not want to archive it. Great cache though. Just a little more walking to
do!!
-
I think that about sums it up nicely. As you can see, it is kind of
confusing where some caches should be listed. Puzzle, multi, mystery,
offset... after a while it is hard to tell sometimes. There are some
mis-labeled caches around. Some caches were just flat out wrong to start
with and I didn't catch them. Some other older caches were listed one
way when it made sense to do then then the definition of a cache type
changes a little and pretty soon there are some caches that are sort of
orphaned in a category where they should not be.
Changing a cache type is not an easy thing to do. For example, You have
a multi cache where the 1st stage always goes missing so you just want
to now make it a single stage. Problem is, 80 people already counted it
in their numbers as a multi. If ya just change the cache type, all of a
sudden everyones count changes. Most folks would not notice BUT there
are some that are real serious about how many, of what kind and in the
exact order with the proper time of day all logged just right. They
would know and would raise a stink.
There are some caches that are listed as a traditional but it goes
missing and the cache owner discovers that they cant change the cache
type. They just tell everybody to now call it a virtual cache and just
"send me a code" of some sort then just go ahead and log it. When I
find those, I archive them as groundspeak does not list virtual caches
any more.
So, we don't just change caches around without a very good reason.
Glenn
RNX wrote:
> -
>
> I agree with Mike's message with one exception. Puzzle Cache Type is
> actually Puzzle/Mystery Cache Type. A puzzle is not required to enter
> this catagory. The Geocaching.com page on cache types lists
> Puzzle/mystery as the catch all for anything that doesn't fit neatly
> into any of the other catagories. A puzzle cache may contain an actual
> puzzle, it may be a cache that has additional requirements to log the
> find, or it may be a cache that is not at the posted coordinates but
> is within 2 miles of those coordinates. There are other reasons a
> cache may be listed as a puzzle/mystery as well. The link is below for
> anyone who would like a refresher;
>
>
> http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#types
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> *Received: *Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:20:35 PM EDT
> *From: *Mike Tollefson
> *To: *geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject: *[GeoStL] Re: ????????????Cache types?????????????????
>
>
> The simple way I look at is:
>
> Traditional cache - there is a cache located at those coordinates - no
> special instructions, a cache is here
> Multi-cache - you need to find things at more than one location - this
> includes offset caches! Doing simple math is not a puzzle!
> Puzzle cache - you need to do something/solve something ahead of time
> or have special knowledge that you may not be able to do in the
> field. When I do "load and go" caching I don't even bother loading
> puzzle caches since I can't solve them in the field (in theory). When
> I cache a specific local area I solve the puzzles ahead of time and
> them load them.
>
> Yes, there are a few caches in the area that are listed incorrectly.
> I can think of a traditional that should be a puzzle. I can think of
> several puzzle caches that are really offset caches using simple math,
> that is a multi! Those are the ones I'm likely to miss when doing the
> load and go thing cuz I will do multi's in those cases.
>
> Mike
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Stephen Martin
> To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 6:57:00 PM
> Subject: [GeoStL] ????????????Cache types?????????????????
>
> -
>
> Ok, here we go. I first have to admit that one of my cache buddies
> partially proved me wrong in my belief on what warrants what in regard
> to cache types. I have one improperly listed cache type. It is Citz
> N Bush( GC1121E ). The debate was how do you list an offset cache
> such as this one. According to the cache type listing guidelines, an
> offset should be listed as a multicache unless there is a puzzle to
> it. Does mine have a puzzle because it uses surrounding visual aids to
> find the cache? I would like to correct this mistake, but the Edit
> Listing option does not allow me to change the type. Although, I
> enjoy the idea of throwing those load and go cachers off, I am not
> really supposed to be allowed to do so.
>
> What do others think? Are there other caches listed improperly that
> anyone is aware of? How should I correct Cizt N Bush? Thanks for any
> feedback.
>
> Stephen
>
> PS- By load and go cachers I mean those who rarely look at more than
> traditional caches to find and tend to not look at the cache page
> before going to search.
>
>
> ****************************************
> For List Info or To make _ANY_ changes, including unsubscribing from this
> list, click -----> //www.freelists.org/list/geocaching
> Missouri Caches Scheduled to be Archived http://tinyurl.com/87cqw
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks
> on Yahoo! TV.
>
> **************************************** For List Info or To make
> _ANY_ changes, including unsubscribing from this list, click ----->
> //www.freelists.org/list/geocaching Missouri Caches Scheduled to
> be Archived http://tinyurl.com/87cqw
****************************************
For List Info or To make _ANY_ changes, including unsubscribing from this
list, click -----> //www.freelists.org/list/geocaching
Missouri Caches Scheduled to be Archived http://tinyurl.com/87cqw
---------------------------------
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
Other related posts:
