MnGCA Home MnGCA
Minnesota Geocaching Association
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   User listUser list   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

virtual caches
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    MnGCA Forum Index -> General
View previous topic :: View next topic  

we all know virtual caches are easy ways to add to the cache total. if given a choice between visiting 2 virtual sites that are otherwise equal, which would you prefer?
one that takes 10 seconds to complete
16%
 16%  [ 2 ]
one that asks me to explore the site for 5 minutes in order to complete it
83%
 83%  [ 10 ]
Total Votes : 12

Author Message
hardware
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Jan 2003

Posts: 157

PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2003 10:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

interesting/unique, not the same word. agreed.

in your first response to my queries, mtn-man, you wrote: "'A virtual cache must be novel, of interest to other players, and have a special historic, community or geocaching quality that sets it apart from everyday subjects.' Band shells are common objects across the country."

hence i argued that this band shell is unique, and would be of interest to others, because of the 100s of individually engraved tiles that are used to create the world map within the band shell. i'll bet your left and right arm that you've never seen a band shell like it, or ever will.

this band shell has a special community quality that sets it apart from everyday subjects. there may be thousands of band shells, but this is unique, perhaps even novel, and therefore fits the criteria you listed. and while it can be found without a GPS, there's a burden of proof that requires more than simply scouting it out. while you're not hunting for a film canister amongst the leaves and sticks on the ground, you're hunting for information within the walls of the band shell. not the same thing, agreed. but again, this site should be given virtual status, even if the bar has been raised.

my question was 'why isn't this interesting enough to be considered worthy of a virtual site?' it is clear now that the issue is a philosophical one. are virtual caches worthy? i think we all know why they are and aren't, according to geocaching.com.

fortunately this "virtually worthless" cache will be ready to go as a multi-micro in a few days, combining the best of both worlds, so to speak.

by the way, i'll pay anybody $50 if they can show me a listing for the excelsior band shell in a qwest dex.


Last edited by hardware on Thu Sep 11, 2003 12:10 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rickrich
Geocacher


Joined: 06 Jul 2003

Posts: 673

PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2003 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mtn-man wrote:
Geocaching is supposed to be a challenge. I don't see much challenge in finding a band shell. If you are that interested in band shells you can look them up in the phone book.


Right there in a nutshell is the root problem as I see it. A handful of adults, mostly male, deciding what is or isn't a "cache".

This is why gc.com needs a collabrative rating system. For all caches, not just virtuals, BTW.

A simple expediency would be to provide exclusionary search capabilities. E.G. Show me the nearest caches, except virtuals. With defaults set in the users profile.

-Rick

P.S. Sledhead: We turned some friends and kids on to geocaching via your bell virtual in Excelsior. By chance we ran into them at Licks one evening. Of course, I had my GPS with me. After everybody got their ice cream, we headed off to the cache. Virtuals are a great introduction to geocaching.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2003 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rickrich wrote:
Right there in a nutshell is the root problem as I see it. A handful of adults, mostly male, deciding what is or isn't a "cache".


I agree. While I understand that it is HIS baby, I think that GC has turned into a large community. I don't think it is up to a handful of people anymore to decide what is best for the community.

Quote:
This is why gc.com needs a collabrative rating system. For all caches, not just virtuals, BTW.


Eh, still subjective and not really going to work...

Quote:
E.G. Show me the nearest caches, except virtuals. With defaults set in the users profile.


They have this as PocketQueries. I guess they want you to pay for GC in order to experience that sort of filtering. I am a little disappointed with the speed in which the filtering is done.

Silent Bob
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kitch
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 18 May 2003

Posts: 1286

PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2003 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
pay anybody $50 if they can show me a listing for the excelsior band shell in a qwest dex.



O.K. I wanted to take that bet...so i went looking for stuff.....

http://www.thearttree.net/aboutus.htm THE BANDSHELL
Place was designed by
Steve Hemingway from Central Michigan University
an Deramic Artist and Educator... and
the place was built of 4000 6x6 terra cotta tiles...

http://www.lakeminnetonkaexcelsiorrotaryclub.org/service.html the Rotary club helped look under Enviromental Protection.

http://www.hemingwayceramics.com/

http://www.homeandawaymagazine.com/Index_The_Twin_Cities.cfm Has the phone number!!

http://www.claysquared.com/hta/contsite.htm
Has the phone number!!!

Just too fun!! Laughing


Last edited by Kitch on Thu Sep 11, 2003 2:01 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
hardware
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Jan 2003

Posts: 157

PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2003 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

very six degrees of separationish, and quite amusing!

by the way, i knew there were hundreds of tiles used, but i don't know that i've ever heard a total for it. 4,000 -- that's impressive. too bad that doesn't make an ordinary band shell unique.
Crying or Very sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mtn-man
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Aug 2003

Posts: 70

PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2003 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rolling Eyes
I sure do see a lot of trees in the background.
_________________
mtn-man... (formerly) Keeping an eye on the King!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rickrich
Geocacher


Joined: 06 Jul 2003

Posts: 673

PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2003 7:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does anyone else find it odd that the July and the August "Featured Caches" would both be rejected by gc.com if they were submitted today?

My nomination for October will be a locationless cache, to keep the streak going.

-Rick
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
hardware
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Jan 2003

Posts: 157

PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2003 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mtn-man wrote:
Rolling Eyes
I sure do see a lot of trees in the background.


i hope you enjoyed your visit to excelsior. how many trees did you count when you walked behind the band shell? how many good hiding spots did you find?

trees do not automatically equate to hiding spots, unless of course they help meet your personal agenda.

thanks for taking the time to post here but not respond to my final question by e-mail. my question is not addressed in http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx so i was hoping for clarification.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mtn-man
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Aug 2003

Posts: 70

PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2003 1:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hardware wrote:
mtn-man wrote:
Rolling Eyes
I sure do see a lot of trees in the background.


i hope you enjoyed your visit to excelsior. how many trees did you count when you walked behind the band shell? how many good hiding spots did you find?

trees do not automatically equate to hiding spots, unless of course they help meet your personal agenda.

thanks for taking the time to post here but not respond to my final question by e-mail. my question is not addressed in http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx so i was hoping for clarification.

I answered your email tonight. Based on the degradation of the emails and the sarcasm in them I have been tempted to turn this over to the upper level admins. I elected to send you a reply and asked you to kill the sarcasm.

Your email clarification question came in at 12:15 PM today. I posted the message above from work after a quick look at the forums, and I did not check my personal email from work today. Sorry about that. Rolling Eyes As you can tell from the time of this post I work some odd hours. I am a volunteer for the site, so I do have to have a real job.

You asked, "am i allowed to tell geocachers they can bypass the micro cache portion of this forthcoming cache and just e-mail answers to the band shell questions i posed, or must i instruct them to go find it and sign the log? i would like people to have the option of either, if the gods of geocaching deem that acceptable."

I responded, "Your asking if can you just make this a virtual cache that also has a container. No." I think the answer is obvious. (After sending the email I realized that it should have been "You're" instead of "Your".)

As far as the trees near the site... I just clicked the link above. Since another cacher showed the link, I will go ahead and post the photo.



I'm sorry, but I am just not as impressed with that band shell as I am with this one below. I still think both are just points of interest though. I have not seen a convincing argument yet, but rather a lot of sniping.



How about a photo of what a clever cacher has done with a micro:


_________________
mtn-man... (formerly) Keeping an eye on the King!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
hardware
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Jan 2003

Posts: 157

PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2003 10:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i have made a case for why this is an interesting, unique community asset that can stand on its own. the trees in the background don't automatically mean that a micro is possible. if you choose to ignore that, there's nothing i can do.

in case it is not clear to anyone, i raised a question about virtual caches. i raised points about virtuals, and we've discussed it. i never referenced mtn-man, he brought himself into this conversation. i have asked his guidance on geocaching.com policies, especially when the answer is not clear, even if i can guess what it is. when i ask for a clarification on a point, but don't get an answer for two days, yet am told in the forum that there are trees behind the band shell, that doesn't help me reach the end result. i had already made it clear i am making this a multi-micro, pointing out something irrelevent rather than responding to what i thought was my last question seems to be of little value.

i get the sense that nothing is worthy of a virtual cache any more. just about any site that people find interesting can be used as a springboard for a multi-cache, which is what mtn-man suggested i do with the band shell, although it has yet to be disproven as a worthy site.

i hope geocaching.com can find a way to give virtual caches the respect they deserve.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
s4xton
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 23 Mar 2003

Posts: 1070

PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2003 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, that looks like a *really* fun Micro!!!

</sarcasm>

Wink

-Aaron
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Kitch
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 18 May 2003

Posts: 1286

PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2003 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mtm-man...what is the cache link for that micro....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
tomslusher
Geocacher


Joined: 02 Jan 2003

Posts: 182

PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2003 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Personally, I think hardware is taking this too far. Just because he thinks it is a cool bandshell, not every one does. Me, personally, I wouldn't care about it. Maybe you think I am an idiot for thinking that way, but that is just me. I thik Mnt-Man has to look at the virtual and decide if he feels lots of other people would care about it. The way I understand it is that it has been left up to "his" descretion.

You may have been able to talk mnt-man into changing his mind, but after you assaulted and abused mnt-man, I'm sure that he made up his mind to not allow this virtual cache. I know that is what I would have done. You can catch many more fly with honey than vinegar.

I was able to talk mnt-man into changing his mind on allowing my virtual cache Clayton, Jackson & McGhie with a calm, respectful persuasive argument. He seemed like a more than reasonable person.

tomslusher
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hardware
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Jan 2003

Posts: 157

PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2003 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i'm not sure who has misled you, slusher, but you ought to get your story straight.

i introduced a series of questions on virtual caches, disagreed that the band shell isn't interesing enough on its own to be a virtual, consented to making the band shell a multi-micro and received a variety of comments pro and con regarding virtual caches. shocking revelation: no matter what the policy is for virtual caches, not everyone will be happy.

you aren't interested in this band shell? i'm happy for ya.

i'm not sure where your allegations of abuse and assault come from, but they're ridiculous. and that's fine. the world needs ridiculousness, too.

mtn-man doesn't like sarcasm in his e-mail. fine and dandy as candy. he wants to make an issue of that here. more power to him. i ask for a clarification on a cache i'm developing, and two days later i'm reading an irrelevent post from him on this thread, yet still waiting for an answer to one question. i point that out in the same thread.

in the meantime i'm working to finalize this multi-micro cache.

mtn-man, whether he likes sarcasm or not, can tell you that i'm expressed appreciation for his time in answering questions pertaining to this subject. or has he been going around all this time telling everybody he's being abused and assaulted, and i just don't realize it? Shocked i'm guessing that characterization comes from you, slushy.

despite all the assault and abuse i've been unloading on poor mtn-man, whom i never referenced in this thread until he interjected himself, i've received valuable feedback from most folks regarding this topic. i don't plan on establishing 50 virtual caches, but the things i've learned will be useful should i ever consider setting one up again.

i make no apologies for any sarcastic comments about the "gods of geocaching." any leadership of an organization is going to be subject to criticism. if there's been a call from the geocaching community to reduce virtual caches, then it hasn't been brought to my attention. instead it seems that the few white males who make the decisions have determined it's not in our best interest to have a greater variety of virtual caches of all difficulties and interest. that's unfortunate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2003 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hardware wrote:
mtn-man doesn't like sarcasm in his e-mail. fine and dandy as candy. he wants to make an issue of that here. more power to him. i ask for a clarification on a cache i'm developing, and two days later i'm reading an irrelevent post from him on this thread, yet still waiting for an answer to one question. i point that out in the same thread.


His job is to approve caches apparently... His job is not to put up with people being sarcastic about his (and his superiors) descisions. Whether you like it or not, they are there to approve caches and don't need to put up with non-sensical garbage from the users when they don't have a cache approved.

Quote:
despite all the assault and abuse i've been unloading on poor mtn-man, whom i never referenced in this thread until he interjected himself, i've received valuable feedback from most folks regarding this topic. i don't plan on establishing 50 virtual caches, but the things i've learned will be useful should i ever consider setting one up again.


the sarcasm really doesn't need to carry over to here either. Just because he brought the issue up here doesn't mean you need to further it.

Quote:
if there's been a call from the geocaching community to reduce virtual caches, then it hasn't been brought to my attention. instead it seems that the few white males who make the decisions have determined it's not in our best interest to have a greater variety of virtual caches of all difficulties and interest. that's unfortunate.


That's where the problem lies. *WE* don't have any opinion that MUST be followed. *THEY* make the descisions (whether they are based on our suggestions or not) and they are final. If THEY don't want virtual caches then that's how it works. If WE want virtuals we can go somewhere else. Money talks. If you feel that navicache is worth the time, please, feel free to support them instead.

Silent Bob
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    MnGCA Forum Index -> General All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Geocaching Cache Icons, Copyright 2009, Groundspeak Inc. All rights reserved. Used with Permission.