Virtual Caches

[RVRoadTrip]

I personally like virtual caches but I wouldn't want OCUS to be known for just virtuals. It would be bad if everyone thought "oh they only have virtuals, no real caches". If the ratio of virtuals gets too high, I may have to temporarily suspend the ability to add new ones until traditional cache numbers catch up. What would be ideal is that those that submit a virtual also submit a traditional cache at the same time. I would love to put out traditional caches but since I move around all the time, there is no way for me to maintain them. And I get really, really annoyed to find a cache that the log is wet or the whole cache is missing and users have been complaining about it for months yet nothing is done by the owner and the listing site won't archive it.

[DudleyGrunt]

Once my two new ones go live this weekend, I'm going to try to get a couple of traditionals (or other types) out in Maryland.

[DudleyGrunt]

After recently seeing a virtual log on a virtual cache (logger did acknowledge the fact and volunteered to delete if CO wanted him to), I have added a line to the requirements for all my virtuals, "In order to log a find, you need to have visited the spot indicated." You can never be too clear.

I may even change it to "In accordance with the definition of a virtual cache, you need to have visited the spot indicated." (including the link)

I did notice one thing in the definition, though. Is "read" really the word we want? I'd think "entered" would make more sense.

A virtual cache is a cache that exists in a form of a location only. The reward for these caches is the location itself and sharing information about your visit. In order to log a find, you need to convince the cache owner you've been at the spot indicated, this is usually achieved with a password to be READ on the site.

Also, perhaps the last sentence could end with, "or a photo to be posted with your log."

[RVRoadTrip]

I saw this when it was posted. If I was the CO, I would remove the log since this is clearly armchair logging. This is why I like to require a photo of the cacher AND his/her GPS at the site. And I edited the virtual cache description to be more clear.

[glorkar]

I guess I'm kind of up in the air about his one. The main objective is to bring people to the place in question, agreed. But I think a secondary objective is to educate people on why said location is unique or of particular interest. Depending on how difficult it is to find the information online, that 'finder' may have learned more than somebody actually visiting the site in person. I would definitely ask them to change their log so as not to give others ideas, though.

[ijeep]

Passwords help reduce armchair logs.

[glorkar]

This is very true. The caches aren't an automatic find, but sometimes the passwords can be found through a little bit of research.

[ToucheTurtle]

ditto! Thanks!

[lostdogsarlington]

If the ratio of virtuals gets too high, I may have to temporarily suspend the ability to add new ones until traditional cache numbers catch up.

A whole bunch of thoughts.

I am glad to see opencaching.us. I am particularly glad to see the opportunity to have virtual caches again. One of the great advantages of virtual caches is the opportunity to "place" caches where for certain reasons a physical cache would not work - and these frequently are places of historic value.

I get the impression that the history of virtuals was problematic. I really hope that opencaching.us will see virtuals as an opportunity and not a worry. Again, I think the value is so high, giving the opportunity to place a cache where you dont want a physical container - that its a real opportunity. Not sure how to eliminate junk-caches, but then again that's what the rating system helps with.

As for passwords and being able to google-guess them, that should be easy. Many Historic signs have serial numbers on them. Another solution is to have the password be something like the first letter of each line of the historic marker. In other situations where such a thing is appropriate, the CO could place a small magnet on the back of the marker with a code on it (this would be site dependent and would not be appropriate for some sights). Perhaps the wiki can come up with some guidelines on how to make passwords but it should be feasible to create passwords that require a sight visit.

I love geocaching with my dogs. I am finding that bushwacking is undesirable because it results in too many ticks. Given the number of educational signs on nature trails, I think virtuals that could be a solution that decreases environmental impact, decreases risk of ticks, poison ivy, snake bikes, while increasing the caching opportunities.

Yeah Virtuals!

[DudleyGrunt]

What I try to do with my Log Passwords is to make them something unrelated to the marker or such, so that it CAN'T be googled. Many historic markers can be found online, for instance.

I think that there is going to be a back log of virtuals, since GC.com hasn't allowed them for some time, so it's natural that there would be a high demand for listing new ones.

If you look at the Statistics page, Virtuals are about 25% of active caches on the site. I think RVRoadTrip was originally worried they might exceed 50% and people would think of us as just / primarily a place for Virtuals.