I would like to wish you all a very warm Happy Christmas. :cheers:
Please take a look at my new series and i hope you all enjoy it. :socool:
Lord Cacher
I would like to wish you all a very warm Happy Christmas. :cheers:
Please take a look at my new series and i hope you all enjoy it. :socool:
Lord Cacher
Terrible, should I allow this shameless self promotion? under the guise of wishing everyone a merry christmas....
Have a good one
Wow, that is some series...! I haven't gone right through the list, but it looks as if it might be 100 caches...!
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light. (Dylan Thomas)
I'm missing something here.
Who's Lord of the Cachers?
What series?
https://www.geocaching.com/profile/?...ebc71b686&ds=2Who's Lord of the Cachers?
https://www.geocaching.com/seek/cach...5-f6debc71b686What series?
and 125 more like it.
I'm not intrested in numbers but thought I'd get on a train at 05:30 to grab a few FTF as I thought it might be nice to have 1 or 2 to my name - ended up with 5 in a very plesent location on a very cold morning.
I Am deffenatly enjoying the series so thank you, and will be back for a few more (not FTF's just caches)
Silly question - but how on earth did a series like this get around the power-trail-guideline (that-doesn't-really-exist) ???
silly question please define what a Power Trail is, in a way that can be applied across the board? And not a personal opinion!
And I've not worked out what the mean average between caches is, but I'm guessing it's around 0.18 miles. it's certanly not 0.11 miles. And is not all drive by caches either.
My post is my personal opinion and as such you do not have my permission to quote me outside of these forums!
Dave
Brenin Tegeingl
Formerly known as Mancunian Pyrocacher on GC
Phew! That's a busy cache setter.
As Keehotee called it "power-trail-guideline (that-doesn't-really-exist)" he obviously isn't going to be able to define what it is.
I agree with the guideline not being applied. Even if they were all drive-bys 0.11 miles apart, I would prefer them to be approved rather than have a set of tedious multicaches that no-one would bother with.
In fact, AFAIK no-one has ever been able to satisfactorily explain that guideline anyway!
My post is my personal opinion and as such you do not have my permission to quote me outside of these forums!
Dave
Brenin Tegeingl
Formerly known as Mancunian Pyrocacher on GC
125 micros? I imagine Pharisee is kick starting his Norton at this very minute.
Or not !!!!
Muggle - One Voice - One Vote
Over 90% are regulars.
maybe pharisee will be jumping on the Norton then!
To be fair to LotC, I believe he doesn't place micros on these trails unless he has absolutely no option - a course of action i think is commendable, which is why most of our new series will be smalls or regs.
Even more commendable is that my parents have just moved to Fleet, whichis oly just down the road from this series! yay!
It's a question that I haven't seen answered yet - what is it about power trails that is deemed so unsatisfactory that they should be banned? One has to hope they aren't banned just BECAUSE people like them! And, just for my own interest please, what is it that makes 0.2 mile spacing "better" than 0.1 mile spacing?
My understanding is that the 0.1 mile guideline is there to minimise people finding one cache when they were looking for another. For that purpose, 0.1 miles is way more than sufficient. So there must be some other reason in the case of power trails, something that's good for us, whether we like it or not, like eating our greens.
My take on it is that the quality of hides is far more important than the spacing. I plan to do a small ring soon (but only a tenth the size of this one!) and the cache are likely to be distributed very unevenly due to the availability of good hiding places. Is it just that someone setting a power trail is less likely to be critical about where they place caches?
As an aside, I find 0.2 feels about right because at 0.1 I barely get myself sorted out from one cache before I arrive at the next. 0.2 gives me a chance to relax and look at the scenery for a bit, rather than just looking ahead for where the next one might be hidden. But I feel uneasy about imposing 0.2 on everyone. If someone can come up with a good reason why we should ALL prefer 0.2, or why 0.2 is good for our souls, I might feel a bit less uneasy about it.
Rgds, Andy
I had a reply ready to post with almost exactly the same wording as Amberel's, that's how similarly we're thinking.
I went for a 0.5 mile minimum for my series, but it was based on the same consideration.
I suspect that "power trails" have been banned under pressure from some who think that it's just "numbers" caching and don't approve of that type of thing. But that's merely my opinion.
I too am thinking the same thoughts as Andy, although I confess to being more accepting of a 0.1 mile gap, and my apologies now to Andy for the about-to-be completed Mugswell circuit of 40 or so - they are rather squeezed in, mainly to provide a nice circuit with plenty of decent sized caches in an area thats full of puzzles and micros!
To repeat other's comments, IMHO the quality of the caches, the hides, and the overall walk, is far more important than the spacing, and my understanding is that it is entirely to prevent finding the wrong cache! Anyone who can find a cache 528 feet away from where its supposed to be and doesn't think it might not be the right cache really needs a new hobby/sport/addiction!
Finally, as they always have been, our own reviewers are always using common sense, and long may this continue!
Dave
I think all three of us are happy with no more than a 0.1 mile limit; it just so happens that Andy and I prefer to space them slightly further apart to improve the quality of the experience (as we see it) for our own preferred way of caching.
If you want to space them right on the limit, I don't have a problem with that; it's your cache series and as far as I'm concerned the guidelines are just to prevent some of the obvious placement problems (e.g. confusing one cache with another) and not to influence perceived "quality".
You actually hit my reasoning on the nail, and the owner was asked. The owner contacted me before hand to get some advice before setting them.As an aside, I find 0.2 feels about right because at 0.1 I barely get myself sorted out from one cache before I arrive at the next. 0.2 gives me a chance to relax and look at the scenery for a bit, rather than just looking ahead for where the next one might be hidden. But I feel uneasy about imposing 0.2 on everyone. If someone can come up with a good reason why we should ALL prefer 0.2, or why 0.2 is good for our souls, I might feel a bit less uneasy about it.
The way it is phrased when I'm asked isno one is forcedI prefer if they were spaced out
I believe part of the reasoning behind the Power Trail Guideline was due to Landowners looking at cache locations on a Map and just seeing a line of flags indicating the caches.
My post is my personal opinion and as such you do not have my permission to quote me outside of these forums!
Dave
Brenin Tegeingl
Formerly known as Mancunian Pyrocacher on GC
A very Happy New Year
from Lord Of The Cachers.
Same to you, my lord. Now, back to the cocktail bar...
Many thanks for the response. I'm not sure if I understand their reasoning over the spacing - if the caches are on a path then you probably have to follow the path whatever the spacing. But I realise that isn't the reason behind your suggestion, and that you're just trying to explain Groundspeak's thinking.
Rgds, Andy
There is certainly a "landowner" component to the power trail guideline... if someone manages a square mile of land and you tell them only that the caches have to be 0.1 miles apart, they could be looking at 100 caches.
There's also a sort of intangible "what's the point" element (which, of course, could be applied to anything about this game, or of course life itself if you want to get really philosophical). If you got the call from your local paper or TV station to show them what this geocaching lark is all about, would you pick a canal path full of micros or a nice big ammo box in the woods? (Someone posted an article in the GC forums from a newspaper in Manchester where the author went out at lunchtime to find an urban micro and ended up rather unimpressed.)
The reviewers are not generally big fans of the power trail guidelines because it requires a degree of subjectivity, which is inevitably followed by accusations of bias, favouritism, etc etc.
I drove past this power trail the other day which has slipped through, possible by being submitted at the rate of one per day for Advent: https://www.geocaching.com/map/defau...223&lng=8.6098
I thought my GPSr had something wrong with it as a huge rectangular blob showed up, but it was just 20 or so Traditional cache icons superposed. My thought looking at the map is "that's just stupid". (Would I go and find them if they were near me? Of course... )
It all comes down to one of the most basic rules of economics: when something is free, it will be abused. In this case placing caches is more or less free (kudos to LOTC if most of his trail really are regular size, but getting 50 micros from your local photo place still seems to be no problem and I believe that Ikea still supplies free pencils h34r, the listing service is free, and the reviewer's time is charged at 0.00 pounds (or, as we say at the moment, Euros ) per hour.
but imagine if someone did place 100 well hidden full sized caches in one square mile!! There's a bit of me that might find that quite amusing :