Delta68

Yup! One of my colleges doesn't bother to sign logbooks. In fact, most of the time he doesn't even bother to open the cache. This is not a problem though because he doesn't log finds on-line either! For him, Geocaching is just something he does when he's on holiday and the fact that a cache has been paced somewhere gives him a reason to go there for a walk Mark

I'd advise doing the physical caches as well or you might end up regretting it (take some TBs to drop off as well ) I have nothing against Virtuals but there's nothing quite like opening a cache at the end of a tough walk, signing the logbook and seeing the names of all those who have done the same. The physical Snowdon cache can be tricky because it's right in the Muggle zone Scafell Pike is pretty easy as it's a short way off the track Ben Nevis is one of my favourite caches ever! It's such a surreal place... Mark

Can we opt out of having Google maps? We currently use a GreaseMonkey script to overlay Google maps (and several others). It would be daft for Groundspeak to pay for something we don't actually need... Mark

So it's a bit silly really You CAN'T have a cache with an ALR saying that you have to wear a pink wig but you CAN have one which says that you can only claim a find if you complete a Challenge which asks you to wear a pink wig!! Mark

Yes, it says so here! Mark

A process like this maybe? CO starts new listing CO checks the checkbox saying it's active Reviewer reviews the cache page Reviewer adds listing to a publishing queue which locks it At scheduled time/date cache gets unlocked and published If desired publish date/time has already passed or no preference is specified, listing gets published immediately This would be great for scheduling new caches to be published at Events ete or for a large series to be published in bulk Mark

There are very valid reasons why being able to search for archived caches would be a good idea but this isn't one of them. If all caches and/or logs were clearly labeled with their GC code it would be a lot simpler to identify dead caches Mark

Not too good at Geostalking are you? I said that it was a Puzzle and I was FTF on it. It's also NOT Premium Member Only *cough* Cov Power *cough*

If 'near' a pylon is a no-no, then 'near' a substation should be close enough to be a no-no even if it's not obvious to a reviewer if it's inside the fence or not. It's a puzzle cache so the CO might have lied about the final location anyway (It does happen! ) I thought it was a bit of a duff location but never gave it second thought really... It will probably take anyone about 30 seconds to identify it in our finds list Mark

I was FTF on cache a few weeks ago which was magnetic keysafe attached inside the perimeter fence of an electricity substation. It's a one of those smallish substations for a housing estate. The reviewer must have considered it to be OK or else it would never have been published... Mark

I think you are confusing two different posts by two different people Mark

The Virtual Alberts Famine GC2E4D was the only one on our to-do list when we went there last year! You can pick up a few others nearby as well Mark

We found a cache a couple of weeks ago which is listed as Trad but you need information from other caches in the series in order to unlock a combination lock. Luckily we did the series in the intended order and picked up the info on the way. Amazingly, even cachers who had to go back for it don't appear to have complained. Did I notify the reviewer? No. Can't be bothered. When they say it's up to us to help improve standards they don't really mean it Mark

I'd say the reviewer is wrong. If it was just a case of needing spanner or screwdriver etc to open the cache then yes, it would still be OK as Trad. Having to go to another location first means it blatantly isn't a Traditional Mark

I've done a few night caches and all except one* have just been 'follow the trail of reflectors' type of thing - no GPS required so it's not 'proper' Geocaching at all really! *the odd one out was follow a trail to a micro containing co-ords for final location Mark

That's just the shortened version of the content in the HEAD part of the page. It looks fine in the main body of the page Mark

No

No, they are treated the same as physical caches Mark

I see the thread has been merged now... I give up! Like I said, we very rarely use the iPhone app anyway... Mark

WELL THAT WAS A WASTE OF TIME WASN'T IT ???? It was already listed as a suggestion Have a look back at the uservoice forum. It was definitely changed to list the tracking codes instead of the 'TB' code not long after the ability to drop trackables was added to the iPhone app As this is no longer how it works, I would say it is a BUG Mark

Good idea! http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=292434

We very rarely use the iPhone app so didn't notice that this feature/bug had reappeared. When dropping a trackable in a cache, having the 'TB' code is no use whatsoever. It was reported and fixed in the days of the UserVoice forum so there's no trace of the original thread any more (not to us mere mortals anyway ) This need to be fixed to as soon as possible to prevent the wrong trackables being logged into caches

This was a problem when the iPhone app was first released and was changed almost straight away. Very odd how it's changed back again. It ought to be submitted as a bug report Mark

There was also a nano under a railway bridge (in the US of A) a few years ago which got archived by a reviewer before it was ever found because it had so many DNFs on it. It used to be on the watchlist but I think I must have removed it. Can't find it now Mark