Thanks Thanks:  0
Results 1 to 32 of 32

Thread: Lord Of The Cachers

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    4

    Default Lord Of The Cachers

    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

  2. #2
    nobbynobbs Guest

    Default

    Terrible, should I allow this shameless self promotion? under the guise of wishing everyone a merry christmas....

    Have a good one

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    5,520

    Default

    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)​


  4. #4
    keehotee Guest

    Default

    I'm missing something here.
    Who's Lord of the Cachers?
    What series?

  5. #5

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martybartfast View Post
    [URL]
    and 125 more like it.
    Wow! Poor old Deci having to review all that lot!!

  7. #7
    hampshire_hog Guest

    Default

    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)

  8. #8
    keehotee Guest

    Default

    Silly question - but how on earth did a series like this get around the power-trail-guideline (that-doesn't-really-exist) ???

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    194

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by keehotee View Post
    Silly question - but how on earth did a series like this get around the power-trail-guideline (that-doesn't-really-exist) ???

    Presumably the same way that all TLOTC series have

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    North Wales
    Posts
    676

    Default

    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

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian View Post
    silly question please define what a Power Trail is, in a way that can be applied across the board?
    Ask any of the Yank reviewers who insist on applying the "rule" over there.

    I'm pleased though, that common sense is still applied over here, good on yer!!

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Longformacus
    Posts
    316

    Default

    Phew! That's a busy cache setter.
    I'm just going outside, and may be some time!

    www.jacobitecaching.co.uk

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Church Warsop, Notts
    Posts
    518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian View Post
    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.
    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!

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    North Wales
    Posts
    676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Happy Humphrey View Post
    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!
    Acually I was hoping for a Miracle . The cache owner was asked to spread the caches out at around 0.18-0.20 minimum distance, something I'm asking all who ask about submitting long trails. Which seem to have become popular in the UK.
    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

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    117

    Default

    125 micros? I imagine Pharisee is kick starting his Norton at this very minute.

    Or not !!!!
    Muggle - One Voice - One Vote

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    5,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muggle View Post
    125 micros? I imagine Pharisee is kick starting his Norton at this very minute.

    Or not !!!!
    I'm surprised he wasn't FTF on the whole series... h34r:
    ​​Do not go gentle into that good night.
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light. (Dylan Thomas)​


  17. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    North Wales
    Posts
    676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muggle View Post
    125 micros? I imagine Pharisee is kick starting his Norton at this very minute.

    Or not !!!!
    Actually I seem to remember seeing a lot of Regular as the size
    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

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Over 90% are regulars.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Of The Cachers View Post
    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!

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Surrey, near Heathrow
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian View Post
    Acually I was hoping for a Miracle . The cache owner was asked to spread the caches out at around 0.18-0.20 minimum distance, something I'm asking all who ask about submitting long trails. Which seem to have become popular in the UK.
    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

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Church Warsop, Notts
    Posts
    518

    Default

    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.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    99

    Default

    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

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Church Warsop, Notts
    Posts
    518

    Default

    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".

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    5,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Of The Cachers View Post
    Over 90% are regulars.
    Oops, kicks himself for making unwarranted assumptions...

    That really does sound like a trail worth doing!
    ​​Do not go gentle into that good night.
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light. (Dylan Thomas)​


  25. #25

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    North Wales
    Posts
    676

    Default

    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.
    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.

    The way it is phrased when I'm asked is
    I prefer if they were spaced out
    no one is forced

    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

  26. #26

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Church Warsop, Notts
    Posts
    518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian View Post
    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.
    All sounds very sensible.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian View Post
    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.
    Not so sensible , but thanks for giving us an idea of the thinking.

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    4

    Default

    A very Happy New Year

    from Lord Of The Cachers.

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Church Warsop, Notts
    Posts
    518

    Default

    Same to you, my lord. Now, back to the cocktail bar...

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Surrey, near Heathrow
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian View Post
    ... The way it is phrased when I'm asked is no one is forced

    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.
    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

  30. #30
    sTeamTraen Guest

    Default

    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.

  31. #31
    nobbynobbs Guest

    Default

    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 :

  32. #32
    keehotee Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nobbynobbs View Post
    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 :
    Until somebody went one better and hid 121 in a square mile... : :lol: :lol:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •