I appologize in advance if I seem frustrated in this post. I am just in need to vent a little bit. I will not be calling anyone out in this post because it happened to me before. Some of you may remember that event. Don't worry, I will not stoop that low.

Anyway, someone had posted a complaint note in the log of one of my caches today complaining about how it was classified as a standard traditional cache instead of a Mystery/Puzzle cache. Others started to post angry logs on it as well. I was able to put a stop to it before the cache page became a discussion/complaint forum. So I entered a note on the cache page instructing where complaints about cache pages should be e-mailed to.

My vent: There are more important things to complain about in life instead of whining and complaining about a simple classification setting on a hobby/game web page. Come on people! Get a life! This is only a game. I am sure that I speak for most cachers out here by saying: When I hide caches, I am hiding them for you. I am spending my gas, money, and time to maintain these caches. It is pretty pathetic that someone has the nerve to complain about something that was given to them, so to speak. It is sort of like "looking a gift horse in the mouth". Is it just me, or are some people taking this game a little to seriously?

Thanks for letting me vent!

Happy caching all and to all a good night!

I think some people do get a little obsessed with geocaching. However it is a game, and people will find differenty aspects that personally make it fun for them (great hiking, visiting new areas, numbers, etc). I think that cachers are allowed to voice their opinion about a cache, but there are ways to do it other than posting log after log on the cache page itself (a simple respectful email will do). I kind of understand the complaint about the cache classification, especially if there is no mention in the description that you have to do something else to find the cache other than going to the posted coordinates and hunting for it (aka Traditional). The only thing that has happened similar to me was when a cache page had a symbol for a medium sized cache (ammo box size) and it really turned out to be a micro. The main problem was that it completely changed the areas I was looking for the cache, and wasted some time. However, hunting for the cache is half the fun. If people start getting mad while searching for a cache, maybe they just need to take a break from that one and move on to another one. You just have to realize it is a game and have fun with it. If caching starts being more of a burden maybe people need to step back and evaluate what it is about caching that they truly enjoy.

Eh, that's just my random opinion. As with most of my thoughts it's probably just nonsense

Go out and have some fun caching

I had the same sort of log posted to one of my cache pages - that I should have listed it as a mystery/puzzle cache because it requires prerequisit tasks prior to hunting the cache. My feeling is that, if a reviewer publishes the cache, it is fine the way it is unless - as Whittling Fisher mentioned - it somehow mis-represents what you are looking for in any way. The individual who posted this note did take it private after I posted a response to his note. Bottom line though is that I felt it was truly not his business in any way. I also agree that cache placement is a GIFT to the community and should not be complained about unless there is truly a REAL problem with the cache. Now that I know I am not the only person whose cache was scrutinized in such a way makes me wonder why someone would go to the trouble of posting notes to multiple pages. Too much effort in my book. I'd rather spend my time caching.

One reason you might be seeing more of this kind of post is that Groundspeak recently changed the requirements of the cache types based on public outcry (<--tongue planted firmly in cheek). If a cache requires an ALR (additional logging requirement) I believe they want it listed as an unknown (commonly called puzzle/mystery) cache. Apparently, any cache with an ALR published as a Traditional before this change was made will create much angst with some people

Sounds like one of those physical caches you find, but have to answer questions/etc. to claim the find.

Talk2azs, you’re obviously passionate to the ‘game’. You yourself may be taking the ‘game’ a little too seriously as well by letting it upset you so.

Many of us spend $/time to hide caches of some value and it's all for the love of the game. Wanna get quick and numerous complaints? Post the coordinates for a micro 100’ off with a difficulty and terrain rating of 1 star each.…on purpose. Would that be right? My opinion is no. On the other hand would it be if the cache description depicted this and rated it appropriately??

I go to see areas, container types, hide methods, etc.. I do try to read each cache ahead of time to see if there is anything that might make me not want to find it such as: 22 stages that I don’t have the time or “take the birth year you find on the tomb stone and google for Saturn’s mass index to...” on site, etc., but I still get fooled occasionally.

As a hider I don't want to be deceptive or inaccurate...unless it's part of the description and stated as such. I have a visual cache I neglected to classify correctly and AFTER several finds, someone posted the need for it to be a puzzle because you can’t just go to the posted coordinates and find the container. Plus, the paperless folks can’t see the graphic well enough, if at all, to solve it. So I promptly changed it. They were right! Was it their business? I believe it is if it causes confusion or wastes their time. Sorry to differ geomuse. Plus reviewers are human and can not be expected to catch everything.

It’s easy to take it personal, but I wouldn’t call their ‘requests’ complaining or whining. It FeedBACK! I don’t know your particular example, maybe it’s ‘County Line Cache’? I see a regular listed, but I read a puzzle to solve. Why wouldn’t you change it?

I find all sorts of cache types to ‘see stuff’. Even DNF’s allow me to ‘see stuff’. Just because I didn’t find it doesn’t mean I can’t post a pic for the memories. But inaccurate or misleading postings cause time/effort to be wasted unjustly. That said, I don’t think that this particular subject is widespread or rampant unlike caches that aren’t available due to MIA cache owners and cache maintenance efforts. But that’s a whole other set of ‘feedback’.

I look forward to discovering more of your caches talk2azs

By far, I really do not take this game too seriously. LOL Just ask Geomuse. She knows me real well. I would be perfectly happy if I did not have any cache hides at all. But it is just my giving nature and the ability to have a very small creative outlet to give all of you something in return for what you have given me.

I am fine now and was able to make nice with all the people involved, but at the time, this incident could be compared to me giving a hungry homeless man something to eat because he was very hungry and then complaining that it was too cold and would not eat it until I warmed it up. LOL

Be good Y'all

I will remain steadfast in my opinion that there is a clear distinction between having to arrive at a "solution" in order to find the cache container and needing to meet prerequisite requirements (as with a challenge cache). If groundspeak now requires challenge caches to be categorized as ? caches, then I will adhere to the requirement. However I, in no way, feel that a challenge cache listed as a traditional (and is at the posted coordinates) is deceitful in any way. The fact that "challenge" is in the title, alone, is a pretty good clue that there are requirements involved. As for having to perform a designated "task" to arrive at the coordinates - well, I can truly see both sides of that. However, I would think some folks would agree that if the description clearly states the task requires looking at a graphic of some sort and they do not have the immediate access to that graphic, then as a cacher, perhaps there has been an err in judgement as to whether or not to pursue that cache. I believe it is a very fine line as to what constitutes a ? cache in some instances.

Keep in mind that there are a lot of cachers that like to look for traditional caches without reading the description so they can have more of a challenge. By making it a mystery cache, they know there is something else going on that they have to do.

I do this and found a local cache without reading the description. I signed the logbook and went home and logged my find. My log was then deleted since I did not know there was some kind of virtual component I had to email the owner. It was a stinker, I wasn't happy about it, but what am I to do. With a mystery cache designation, I would have known.

Just something else to consider I guess, from the perspective of the cache owner and the cache seeker I suppose.

quote:

Keep in mind that there are a lot of cachers that like to look for traditional caches without reading the description so they can have more of a challenge. By making it a mystery cache, they know there is something else going on that they have to do.

To me, if it is the cacher's preference to not read the description in order to know what they are looking for, then that is their personal agenda. The fact that they wish to not look at the description, I feel, does not obligate the cache owner to change the designation of the cache as long as they have provided all of the necessary requirements to log the cache. To take this one step further, if the hunter of a cache decides to use coordinates only, and therefore is not aware of what type or size container they may me seeking, couldn't that cause unnecessary environmental harm or otherwise compromise the integrity of the cache? Just a few thoughts.

Yeah, I understand. I get both sides. Some read the hint every time, some don't read anything. I didn't protest my deletion, but I still didn't like it. I signed the logbook. I found the cache. Maybe someday I will go back to it. Don't know. I don't even have to sign the logbook or even look for the cache container. All I need is the virtual additional logging requirement.

I also know when to stop and read the description, but it is more fun to find them without them to me. I honestly think that evil, impossible to find hides do more environmental damage than not reading the description. Just an opinion though.