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

Re: [NUTS] Re: How big is large, how small is small

Expand Messages
  • nelson143@sbcglobal.net
    Marky is right...there is no official mini cache. It s just a term used to describe a very small micro. It s still listed as a micro. I believe a multicache
    Message 1 of 11 , Feb 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Marky is right...there is no official "mini" cache. It's just a term used to
      describe a very small micro. It's still listed as a micro.

      I believe a multicache is listed by what the final cache turns out to be. If
      you find 4 micros to get to the final ammo can stage, it's listed as a
      "regular".

      Ed


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "George" <gvcache@...>
      To: <nuts_@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 7:09 PM
      Subject: [NUTS] Re: How big is large, how small is small


      >
      >
      > Did we forget "Mini". Looks to me like the "Micro" on the proposed
      > list of descriptions is actually a Mini. A Micro will accomodate a
      > piece of paper with typed text not exceeding 200 characters in 8 point
      > type. These are the tiny creations that require a photo or the answer
      > to some specific question to log.
      > Wondering how one might classify a multi which includes a micro for
      > the first stage, a mini for the second stage, a micro for the third
      > stage and a regular for the final stage.
      > I guess it ain't a perfect world..............................
      >
      >
      > --- In nuts_@yahoogroups.com, Escapades <escapades4cache@y...> wrote:
      >>
      >> There has been a lot of discusion recently in The Geocaching Forums
      > and in Todays Cacher Magazine on how to rate your cache size. They
      > are trying to come up with a uniform guideline so when you go out to
      > find a cache you will have an appoximate idea on the size you are
      > searching for.
      >>
      >> We were never sure when we placed a cache if it was a micro, small,
      > regular or large. Here is what they came up with and it seems like a
      > good guideline to me. Now I just need to go back through the 36
      > caches we have hidden and fix the size and add the attributes.
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> Micro - will fit a scroll log and up to a few marbles
      >> Small - will fit a flat logbook and up to a few golfballs
      >> Regular - will fit a large logbook and up to a few softballs or
      > international equivalent
      >> Large - will fit a soccer ball and larger
      >>
      >> Mike
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Northstate Unusual Treasure Seekers!
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Mark Yvanovich
      ... Mini seems/feels larger than a micro to me. Around these parts, the smaller than micro size is affectionately known as a nano-cache. :) --Marky
      Message 2 of 11 , Feb 3, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        nelson143@... wrote:

        >Marky is right...there is no official "mini" cache. It's just a term used to
        >describe a very small micro. It's still listed as a micro.
        >
        >

        Mini seems/feels larger than a micro to me. Around these parts, the
        smaller than micro size is affectionately known as a nano-cache. :)

        --Marky
      • Tag
        Be very leary of the upcoming Nano nano Nano ((said in a childlike taunting voice) cache being devised in Elk Grove. Oldhippy ... From: Mark Yvanovich To:
        Message 3 of 11 , Feb 3, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Be very leary of the upcoming Nano nano Nano ((said in a childlike taunting voice) cache being devised in Elk Grove.
          Oldhippy
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 8:50 PM
          Subject: Re: [NUTS] Re: How big is large, how small is small

          nelson143@... wrote:

          >Marky is right...there is no official "mini" cache. It's just a term used to
          >describe a very small micro. It's still listed as a micro.

          >

          Mini seems/feels larger than a micro to me.  Around these parts, the
          smaller than micro size is affectionately known as a nano-cache.  :)

          --Marky




          Northstate Unusual Treasure Seekers!

        • George
          Well, I ve learned something today. I always thought that, in terms of describing the relative size of objects, a Mini anything would be larger than a
          Message 4 of 11 , Feb 4, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Well, I've learned something today. I always thought that, in terms
            of describing the relative size of objects, a "Mini" anything would be
            larger than a "Micro" anything. When the Mini skirt went out of style
            I had heard something about a "Micro skirt" that would follow. I had
            been looking forward to that but, if it's going to cover more than the
            Mini skirt did, there's no sense in holding on to false hopes.



            --- In nuts_@yahoogroups.com, <nelson143@s...> wrote:
            > Marky is right...there is no official "mini" cache. It's just a term
            used to
            > describe a very small micro. It's still listed as a micro.
            >
            > I believe a multicache is listed by what the final cache turns out
            to be. If
            > you find 4 micros to get to the final ammo can stage, it's listed as a
            > "regular".
            >
            > Ed
            >
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: "George" <gvcache@y...>
            > To: <nuts_@yahoogroups.com>
            > Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 7:09 PM
            > Subject: [NUTS] Re: How big is large, how small is small
            >
            >
            > >
            > >
            > > Did we forget "Mini". Looks to me like the "Micro" on the proposed
            > > list of descriptions is actually a Mini. A Micro will accomodate a
            > > piece of paper with typed text not exceeding 200 characters in 8 point
            > > type. These are the tiny creations that require a photo or the answer
            > > to some specific question to log.
            > > Wondering how one might classify a multi which includes a micro for
            > > the first stage, a mini for the second stage, a micro for the third
            > > stage and a regular for the final stage.
            > > I guess it ain't a perfect world..............................
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In nuts_@yahoogroups.com, Escapades <escapades4cache@y...> wrote:
            > >>
            > >> There has been a lot of discusion recently in The Geocaching Forums
            > > and in Todays Cacher Magazine on how to rate your cache size. They
            > > are trying to come up with a uniform guideline so when you go out to
            > > find a cache you will have an appoximate idea on the size you are
            > > searching for.
            > >>
            > >> We were never sure when we placed a cache if it was a micro, small,
            > > regular or large. Here is what they came up with and it seems like a
            > > good guideline to me. Now I just need to go back through the 36
            > > caches we have hidden and fix the size and add the attributes.
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >> Micro - will fit a scroll log and up to a few marbles
            > >> Small - will fit a flat logbook and up to a few golfballs
            > >> Regular - will fit a large logbook and up to a few softballs or
            > > international equivalent
            > >> Large - will fit a soccer ball and larger
            > >>
            > >> Mike
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Northstate Unusual Treasure Seekers!
            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.