1364Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: virtual caches not approved
- Aug 1, 2003I agree with George. I was in California this summer, for a few days, and had the opportunity to do 3 caches. One was a virtual... that could have been a real cache, not too many people etc. Nothing Wow about it. One had food in it, and was in a place posted as a dangerous area, and one was a decent cache, but in a high traffic area, that would make it difficult, at times, to hunt. I don't know Hemlock, but his moniker speaks volumes. I wasn't particularly impressed with CA, but now I am not at all impressed. He left his email, and I intend to share a little of my Texas Pride with him.... all of you are invited to do the same...Cindy
"George D. Nincehelser" <george@...> wrote:
That's the first time I've heard of the "WOW" test. It's far too
I see a micro here as debatable. Having one wouldn't add anything to my
pleasure. In fact, I think it would be an annoying distraction. The focus
should be on learning the history and background of the site.
If it was just a micro, many people would just sign the log and leave, but
making it a virtual forces people to interact with cache at an intellectual
level, and to me that's pretty cool.
In short, I like this cache as-is.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Will Nienke" <9key@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 10:31 PM
Subject: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: virtual caches not approved
> Well stated Wayne.
> The cache page in question is posted here:
> I think I've stated this previously - if you have a beef with GC.com
> or anything / anyone associated with it, post it on the big league
> forums - gc.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>