- Greg, I have hunted caches that had pictures attached and frankly it makes no difference to me if there is or isn't.....as long as the picture is not a spoiler aka....showing the cache in it's location.....what's the fun of that .....there needs to be some mystery or caching is not nearly as much fun....a picture of the area or a picture of a special feature is nice and there have been times that I have looked at a picture of the surrounding area and then went to find the cache because of that feature .....but I hunt for the thrill of the chase and the find so I will take it either way... Dan (Thunder) --- Greg Ponder <thehairyhillbilly@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Since I live in the boonies and have very few caches > available to find, I've been hiding caches. Someone > suggested that I attach photos of the area where > I've hidden the cache. My whole purpose of hiding > caches is to make people aware of some great > scenery, so the suggestion makes some sense. > However, I'm worried that it will ruin the > surprise--that the "Wow! I'm glad I bushwhacked > across three states to see this place" will be > reduced to "Well, I think the picture's better." > > What does everyone think? Would you go regardless of > whether or not a picture is attached? Or would a > picture get you moving more quickly? > > I appreciate the input and thank you in advance. > > The Hairy Hillbilly > > (Who May Soon Have More Caches Hidden Than Caches > Found!) > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com **************************************************************************** Our WebPage! Http://WWW.GeoStL.com Mail List Info. //www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=geocaching The SLAGA E-store is closed for image repairs...... ****************************************************************************