[GeoStL] Re: Geocaching.com & Virtuals

  • From: "Chris Binder" <cpbinder@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 06:15:06 -0500

yeah...but do you think the science center would not know:
a) What geocaching even is?
b) Why there's a micro cache under the top-left nosebleed seat?

I usually don't get down there too often, so an actual cache that would need 
maintaining is out of the question. I'm just trying to make geocaching look 
good...not have the bio-terrorism truck out in front of the SLSC. :-)


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dave Keiser 
  To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 7:32 PM
  Subject: [GeoStL] Re: Geocaching.com & Virtuals

  Your frustrations are valid. But, from a land manager's perspective, I'm sure 
they'd rather have virtuals in their parks. They might wonder why there's a 
virtual at the Science Center while they have to put up with a yucky tupperware 
full of trash in their own park. And if they all opt for virtuals, then 
geocaching really becomes geoplaquefinding.

  As far as the science center goes, you could easily do an offset cache/multi 
cache with Forest Park right there. Use the sign in the Science center to 
compute the waypoint for a cache, force the cacher to walk over the highway 
overpass (seeing MORE of the science center) and exit the old planetarium to 
find a microcache or something. Glenn would approve that in a heartbeat. Or, if 
you have the guts and willingness to maintain it, place a microcache magnetic 
key holder under one of the permanent exhibits (with permission, of course). 
Or, make it really difficult and pick a seat in the IMAX theater to place it 
under!!! The hint could be 'top left nosebleed seat'. Or, I'm sure RGS could 
figure out how to get a microcache planted on the dinosaur! Ok, I'm getting a 
little out of hand. Sorry.

  Dave (fullquiver)

  On Tuesday, September 16, 2003, at 05:14 PM, Chris Binder wrote:

    Ok...before you just haul off on me...just know that the following 
statements are explicitly my opinion and I'm not taking a shot at *gln or 
anyone over at geocaching.com.
        First off...My Science Center Virtual Cache wasn't approved...I kind of 
understand why...but seriously, many of us don't get a chance to go on down to 
the SLSC too often, and some of us have kids that dictate when, if ever, we all 
go to the science center. Honestly, I make the effort to make a cache that's 
good for the entire family. It's not one of those "hit-and-run" virtual caches 
that you can do over a lunch break. It's a cache that you need to park and find 
a sign inside of a building. It brings business to the science center, and 
allows families who don't get down there too often, to reward themselves for 
visiting with a cache find.
        Secondly, how do you feel on this issue: We buy the receiver. Some of 
us buy a charter membership. And geocaching.com dictates what the entire world 
of geocaching can and cannot do? :-) Personally...I like the website...I like 
the camaraderie that goes on in this newsgroup and in SLAGA. I like what SLAGA 
is doing. My problem is why geocaching.com is complaining on the number of 
        I'm not completely finished yet. I'm offering something constructive to 
say, bear with me: We all should work on a separate rule list that applies to 
virtual caches only. Like: No other virtuals within a .50 or a .75 mile radius. 
Or all virtuals should be above a rating of 2.0/1.0. Those are my thoughts. 
Thanks for listening. :-)

Other related posts: