BAMBOOZLE

I liked the sudden stops for a locationless and the research needed to find a place that was not taken, given the limited number of categories that were frozen in place by the time I started. I still think of it when I spot something that would have qualified for an obscure locationless, particularly if the category eluded me. But as the game grew, the available spots became fewer and fewer. The purpose behind locationless had been served. It was time for it to end when it ended. It did give me one of the fun trips I have had while playing this game, tracking down as many as I could during the final week. As far as the prime directive goes, I like to find things, too. Still, there are places where traditionals are not appropriate and its nice to find things as part of this game. Some of my favorite finds - in every sense of the word - have been virtuals. I am planning a trip now, and have identified a handful of traditionals I want to find. The rest are earthcaches and virtuals, although there are some virtuals that have been archived since we first began thinking about the trip so I have less to find. That does not mean I want virtuals to return without limits or to go back to the wow factor. Those are not the only options. But since Groundspeak will not even allow virtuals to be adopted, to keep the existing virtuals into play, I know I will have less to find as time goes on. Well, the one Virtual and three Earthcaches I put out are still in play. We never pass a virtual and will go well out of our way to grab one....I'll say, hey there is a virtual and we get a little excited. It sure seems like there would be a way to make it work. Maybe the Virtual reviewer would remain anonymous and his say is final, no appeals...if he says no, its no...done. I'd take the job on that basis.

I've said before, the day they do that is the day I retire as a volunteer here. I lived through the wild wild west days and have no desire to return to them. We can't exist without reviewers so if it was that bad I guess we could do without. I found 315 virtuals and don't remember many as " lame " but then almost everything interest me....again, its been awhile so my memory may not be what it should on this.

To phrase it as a "score on gc.com" is both accurate and oversimplified. I like virtuals that are part of this game. By definition, that creates a score on this site, but it has to do more with the way that geocaching can be played and less than any particular score. When earthcaches were moved to Waymarking, I enjoyed the ones that were grandfathered on this site but never looked at the others. I will do some of the remaining webcams, but do not seek them out as waymarks. And although I like many wherigos, I have not done any of the cartridges that do not have an associated cache. In the end, I am not looking for another location-based game to play. To me, that is why Groundspeak has never been as successful with its other games. Waymarking was billed as an answer for both locationless and virtuals - but it seems like just another check in game played on a gpsr rather than my phone. The Geocaching Challenges were supposed to appeal to those of us who like virtuals, but was separated from caching and accordingly missed the mark in how it was designed. I could never quite figure out Groundspeak's egg hunt game (a short lived ios app) but it appears very few people did either. I'll stick with caching, at least until the last virtual is archived. There are plenty of other location-based games or check-in apps that I could be playing right now. I dabbled with a couple (Gowalla and Ispy) when they were around. I could be doing virtual or locationless caches elsewhere. But I am not looking for ways in which virtuals could be part of a different game. I would like them to continue to be part of what I do now, even if it seems unlikely. I like this post and think it speaks for most of us....I also only seek the earthcaches listed on this site. For the life of me I can't figure why GS won't bring back the Virtuals because so many really liked them and for a business to ignore what a customer wants is not a good thing. Power trails are here not because they are a good thing but because the customer wanted them.....O.K. I buy that. I think Virtuals were WAY better for the game than PT's....there is nothing " interesting " about a PT. Come on GS, just do it....let the reviewers weed out the really lame stuff and maybe set a limit of Virtuals per account.

When you tell it the unit is a 64, and you "send waypoints", they will be sent as a GGZ file. It all happens behind the scenes... You don't get a choice. If you are fancy and use the GarminExport macro, you can choose. Ah, I've only used it a couple of times and was using the 62S setup for sending thats why the files were GPX. I see when set for 64S the File Name ends in ggz.....if I backspace that off and type gpx will it send in that format ? Also, when using a 62S ,is it in File Name where I would change " geocaches " to some other word to keep from overwriting when I want to put on multiple GPX files....I have been combining these files in to one file in GSAK and then loading. Finally, will the 64S read multiple ggz files ?

Been using GSAK for years but just got the new ver a few months ago.....don't recall it defaulting to GGZ though, other than getting my PQ's direct from GS it seems business as usual.

Thanks for the answers.....gives me info. to play with.

How many caches can my 64S hold in the GPX format I am used to using ? Is it 5000 like my 62S ? On the 62S if you load 5000 caches many times there are issues and I keep it to below 3000.....are there issues when you load 5000 GPX to the 64S?

Whew! That was a mercifully brief discussion for once! Not so brief--I've found many preforms where the cap is cracked or broken, and the log is wet. Sounds like a maintenance issue. How old was the cache listing? How long (or how many visits) was it listed before the cap was broken? Did the owner do maintenance? Were there NM logs and were they ignored by the owner? I've seen good containers (ammo cans, authentic Lock & Locks, pelican boxes) that were broken, they lasted a while (usually years) but eventually succumbed to wear and tear - the owners however did not check on them or respond to logs that mentioned the problem. It's not that preforms aren't good geocaching containers but that some cache owners don't do maintenance when wear and tear occur. Another question I'd ask is: was the container hidden in such a way that the cap would be exposed to sunlight? UV light breaks down plastic, so it won't matter how good your container is if you've left it unprotected. Eventually, the plastic will become brittle and crack. That's why you should always use paint, camo-tape, or something else to cover a plastic container that will be exposed to the sun. +1......probably 90% of my micro hides are painted preforms.I will use an occasional match safe or bison but when I do I replace the cheap factory 0-ring with a thicker buena-n o-ring. I also carry a bag of various size o-rings for replacing damaged ones I find....as said, almost all are damaged as brand new they are not much good.

In The Beginning cachers NEVER told Looking for spiders, snakes, etc.....I would rarely even tell police. Now I pretty much tell everyone....if you're a CO that wants ultimate secrecy hide them where there are no people.

I got the 64S ( because of your heads-up ) for $179....I recommend the OP wait and get one on sale.

Well stated regarding the compass....got my first and best 3 axis on the Meridian Platinum in 2003 followed by the 450, 62S, and now 64S ( my 60 CSx has the 2 axis ).....it may be my favorite feature.

I agree completely.

I would say it looks like an average cache hiding spot....no issues with pulling off, parking, turning around, or muggles may make it a little better than average....right off the bat its a better location than 95% of urban hides.

We have found many caches inside of buildings.

Its usually not a good idea to take a picture of a cache location or of a special container that the CO wants to be a surprise for those that find it. I see no problem with a picture of contents that do not reveal the above. We take pictures of neat containers and hide techniques but we don't post them to the cache page......we post them days or weeks later to a different cache page far from where the photo was taken ( ex found this neat hide sometime ago ), this way I keep a record of these in my gallery without giving anything away ( sometimes I post them on my own cache pages ).

I like the Garmin City Nav maps on the mini SD card.....snap it in and you're in business with the whole U.S.,....it runs in the $60-$70 range...all points of interest are on it , restaurants, hotels, etc

I have a 450 and 3- 62S units ( among others ).......I vote for the 62S.

Same here...but that's beside the point, really. I didn't see anything the OP's description that would have made it any less publishable than the myriad other much more commercial caches that get published on a near-daily basis. I agree here.....we have found dozens if not hundreds that have led us to interesting businesses, I always try to visit a business, especially one who has granted permission for a cache, and hopefully, buy something. IMO I think the reviewer may be too picky and I understand how the OP must feel...it must wear on you a bit to know every cache you submit is going to be rejected for one thing or another. The first place to start is to have a heart to heart conversation with your reviewer. A few years ago the game was changing and I wasn't and my caches weren't getting approved quickly....once I realized what my reviewer was looking for and complied most of my caches get approved in hours.

+1 Ditto +3.....using my iPhone as a " Hotspot " I have been able to use my laptop in the field....I did it really as an experiment.

This is the way to go......I'm opening mine Christmas.

Long thread but two thoughts : 1. Pro...adding a log will keep a cache going and enhance the experience of future finders. 2. Con...adding a log keeps a dilapidated cache in play and encourages lax maintenance by CO's. I'm in the first group but I have news for you.....both are true. I think we need to take our pick and let it go. Problem is on this forum if you advocate #1 you get hammered.

You have too much error and I think this is your answer.....it may take 5-10 minutes in some cases for waypoint averaging to lock in. On long hikes I have set points in deep woods and on the way out I'll be within a couple of feet.As said the altimeter is a different animal and you may see variations....I will say that on long vacations in the mountains I was amazed how many times my units have been dead on according to highway signs.

Same software as the 62S which we have ( I can't open my 64S until Christmas )....when picking a cache to go to I use the map and my wife uses the list.

That is why old analog meters put a mirror behind the indicator to assure the reading is at ninety degrees thus mitigating human error. My favorite meter for trouble shooting is my old trusty Simpson 260 with the mirrored scale.....as you say its great when you're at odd angles to the display.

If I get to GZ on a cache hunt and find a container and log I sign the log and move on. Too many other new places to see to waste time over analyzing any particular hide.