Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

16731Re: Multi Caches

Expand Messages
  • A Allen (SEMIK)
    Jun 29, 2006
      In mine and mda_taz's case (we live in Manor), its the construction
      of the toll road between us and pf'ville! Its simply awful! We raced
      for two or three FTF a month or so ago and got really fed up with all
      the road blocks. We really have to go out of the way to get up there
      now. We haven't been in that area for errands or geocaching for
      quite some time. We cleaned out most of Pf'ville a few months ago and
      have just been doing pngs for puzzle solutions there when we were
      already in the area on other business. We'll get to yours
      eventually -- it may be after school starts and we start having
      regular trips to Round Rock again.

      We like multis, we like seeing the numbers in each cache type grow --
      not just our bottom line. We're currently working on the MONSTER (of
      them all) -- and except for power caching or filling in on TBI
      Tuesday we've been caching around the legs of it. (We had to chase
      the MONSTER up to Georgetown and that seriously stalled pf'ville

      I do agree with Julie (MCP) about stating in the description what
      kind of time investment there is for a "finder" to complete the multi
      and the number of legs doesn't hurt either. Those are the two pieces
      of information I scan for when I am in unfamiliar territory so it is
      very likely others do the same.

      If you already have both pieces of information in your descriptions
      then its just the timing of the hide -- many have "cleared" out the
      area of the caches and they're either waiting for a lull in their
      schedules or waiting for more caches to be placed in the area to hit
      your multi (a multi shows up as only one cache on a gpsr screen).

      Its a known fact that geocachers are attracted to clusters -- not
      just because of the numbers/stats -- its the gratification of all
      those boxes!! Indeed we have been spoiled over the last year
      with "clusters".

      Keep 'em coming guys. Don't take it personal (look at the traffic on
      my puzzle caches -hah! and folks aren't even trying to solve them --
      or at least they're not asking for hints) there will be weekends
      where you'll get frustrated with the number of logs you get on them
      because you're waiting on a publish notice or a ftf notification...

      See ya around,

      --- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "lowelldennis"
      <cyberclops@...> wrote:
      > Uncle Fluffy and I have a serios question for the geocachers in
      > area ...
      > Do you generally disregard multi-caches?
      > We ask because we currently own two multi-caches. "Who left that
      > here? Is that yours?", GCTFYT, which was published way back on
      > February 21st and "The Pflugerville Loop", GCW2RA, which was
      > on June 8th. If you combine both of them ... only 10 people have
      > logged them as found. They are not hard. TPL is a series of
      > PNGs that should take less than an hour and WLTHITY while wierd is
      > very easy and quick (10 minutes or so).
      > Uncle Fluffy and I put a lot of work into them, especially TPL, and
      > not feel we are getting a very good response. Like anyone who puts
      > caches out there we want them to be found. After all we put them
      > for your enjoyment, not ours (OK, we enjoy reading the logs and
      > hearing people's reactions to our warped sense of humor - but it is
      > truly to give back to those of you who support our addiction).
      > We ask the question to determine if we want to put any more multi-
      > caches out there. We are also considering busting TPL up into a
      > series of caches that each contain part of the location of the
      > cache (like Stratman's "SWAG Nasty" or Geomires "Quick Sax"
      > Those of you who have found TPL will understand the challenge this
      > presents. But, would this be preferable to a true multi-cache?
      > Unfortunately, the legs of WLTHITY are not far enough apart to get
      > approved so it will have to stay as a true multi-cache.
      > We would appreciate any feedback you could give on this.
      > Thanks,
      > Cyberclops and Uncle Fluffy
    • Show all 20 messages in this topic