janx

Bingo! You filter out parking lot hides by using the map tool on GC.com in satellite mode. I don't dump all the caches in my area to my GPS. I pick out the caches I want to find. I identify the caches I want to find with the tools GC.com gives me, and the best tool is the map tool. It's pretty easy to tell the diference between a parking lot cache and something near some trees.

So the simple answer is: If the player logged a find online, but didn't sign the physical log, the owner has the right to delete the online log. This is supported by the cache guidelines. Besides "cheating", there are plenty of plausible reasons for not having a matching paper log and electronic log. However, the rules say, SIGN THE PAPER LOG. If you didn't sign the paper log, and your online log gets challenged or deleted, it's your fault, and your problem. It's really that simple. For the record, I don't particularly care for signing paper logs (or trading). I'd much rather the cache had a "secret" ID number, that I would have to record into gc.com to log the find. In that respect, my view is akin to RK, the electronic log is the useful part (it's the easiest to work with).

Simple fact of life: You can't control what other people are going to do. So expect that some folks won't trade-even (or that you won't agree it's even). Since you're not there to negotiate, it's a not a trade, it's just a a swap. Nowadays, I generally take nothing, leave nothing. I don't expect to find anything cool in a cache, and I don't feel like carrying a ton of stuff of varying value, just for a trade. Though I hate Micros, they tend to get to the meat of matters, a hidden thing in the wilderness, for me to find.

Start with the easy stuff. Micros can be hard, avoid them for a while. Try some caches in parks, along walking trails. Those tend to be easy. Go to some event caches and meet other caches. They will talk endlessly about hides they've found, which give clues on what to look for. Plus, see if you can form up an expedition to go caching with an experienced player. You'll make a friend, and get their sense of "how its done". Several of my first finds were DNFs. It happens. There are a lot of other good tips, on using/trusting the GPS, and reading the logs. Bring a print-out of the cache, with log comments (or an electronic copy). There's a lot of clues and information in those. Look for caches that have been found recently, because they are more likely to be still there. The last DNF I had hadn't been found for a few months, which had been right before Hurricane Ike. Gee, I wonder why I couldn't find it....

I'm a database guy. I see the NM log as something searchable, that can trigger code to do things later. I fyou log a NM, that can show up in a query for "all caches that need Maintenance". It can also flip a bit on the cache, so the owner has to "fix it" to clear the bit. That means that if a cache is set to Needs Maintenance, I can later run a report on NM caches that have been ignored by their owner. From there, other steps can be taken. Putting that info in a FoundIt log, doesn't ensure that can't of thing can happen. That's why there is a NM log type. Ultimately, the protocol seems to be: If you FOund the cache { if your signed the log then log a FoundIt if the cache needs work, log a Needs Maintenance } else log a DNF

When you go to a caching event, and discover that you've been caching longer than the "old timers"

You can write whatever you want in the log (though good manners should be applied). It's usually best to sign with the same name as your GC.com account, that way the owner knows who is who from the electronic log and the paper log. However, putting "team" isn't a crime. I often refer to the people who go caching with me as "Team Janx", but I only have the one "Janx" account. Since they don't have gc.com accounts, it's no big deal.

DNF and Needs Maintenance are the proper methods for communicating to the owner and other cachers that the cahce is "hard to find" or may be missing. Ultimately, you CAN'T know if the cache was missing, or just well hidden. That's the owners job. If you didn't find the cache, log a DNF. If somebody else finds it, you know that YOU missed it. If a bunch of DNFs pile up, the owner knows to check on it. Needs Maintenance is for caches that get found, and need maintenance. It's all pretty simple.

It's a known metric fact (often not cited by consultants selling metrics) that you get what you measure. The site measures Finds, by displaying them so prominently. The result is, people try to increase their finds, because Finds are good, and a high number is good. Start displaying DNFs, and since DNFs are bad (can be implied), people will try to keep the count low. And that may mean failing to report a DNF on a cache that is missing, and really needs the DNF logs to prove the point. I log DNFs for any cache I don't find. It helps me note that I looked for it, so I can revisit it, and it helps others validate if the cache is hard to find, or just missing.

So the basics of the gc.com cache posting guidelines is you gotta have a log, and you gotta have permission. If the OP has an idea for a "urbex" cache that meets ALL the cache posting guidelines, there's the no problem, and the rules take care of it all. If on the other hand, "urbex" caches break the rules, and ARE approved on gc.com, they need to be reported and shut down.

since the OP said he was coming from another cache listing site, to list here, he obviously forgot something important: The requirements to list a cache on gc.com may NOT be the same as other listing sites. It's really that simple. It is short-sighted to assume that your complex cache will be legal on another site. It's all in the requirements and guidelines that each site enforces.

It is illegal in the US to posess human remains without proper paperwork. Pretty sure making a travel bug out of a human part would be illegal, and not in a geocaching kind of way.

barring the M&M can being 10 feet from a new cache, under what normal scenario are you hunting down archived caches. Let's say BadCache Bob plants a micro in the woods. It's crap. He gets complaints, he archives it, opening up the space. GoodCache Gus plants an ammo can in the area. Odds are good, they are NOT going to be in the same area, but within the .1 mile limit. At what point are any of you hunting down Bob's cache? It's not likely to show up in a query, you'll probably filter archived caches out. While it's a darn shame Bob's sloppy and doesn't clean up his trash, unless you're a nosy busybody, you shouldn't be stumbling over it. Who the heck hunts down archived caches, just to verify they've been removed? While on one end, it's nice that somebody tries to clean up after the game, it does border on the "who the heck made you the cache cops?!"

I'd assume the following about cache types: traditional: cache is at the coordinates posted (disregarding inaccuracies inherent in GPSr tech) Puzzle: listing gives clues to coordinates, cache is at the coordinates posted (disregarding inaccuracies inherent in GPSr tech) Multi: listing gives coords to first clue of how to find the cache, cache is NOT at the coordinates specified in the listing In reality, Multi's are often puzzles. The first cache gives clues to the second, and so on. Technically a multi could just list the coords to the next cache in the multi, but few that I've seen do that. Probably a real clue is that each point on a multi would meet the requirements of a real cache (log book). Whereas, a puzzle cache is about making you find/figure out the elements needed to get the final coords. Except for the final, each coord doesn't have to be qualify as a traditional (no logbook, might be a sign with another clue).

so next time, instead of doing your initial reply as "I just sent your reviewer a PM to ban your cache", try this: "I hope your not planning to drill into fixed rocks/rockbeds, that would probably be against the rules, similar to digging holes/nailing into trees. If your just drilling into portable" rocks you bring onto the site, that's probably OK" It's much less donkey like. Don't be a donkey.

I've learned that people who don't read the forums are generally happier about their hobby than those that do.

That was one of the reasons I switched from Verizon to AT&T. That and so I could get an iPhone. Which oh yeah, solves the first reason.

As someone pointed out, caching at night makes it harder to see trail heads (thus missing them). This happens when you walk around with a flashlight. The flashlight is narrowing your pupils, which is why this happens. Therefore, it is best to walk to the cache with no lights (ambient light only). If it's too dark to do this, you shouldn't be out there. Once you get to the target, the flashlight may be useful to spot shiny surfaces on the cache container, but once again, it'll mess with you night vision.

You don't need to do that. It's obvious you're new to forums (asking what abbreviations stand for is a clue). Forums are like bulletin boards except with nearly infinite space (from a technical stance, the text this post wastes is insignificant to store on a hard drive). Your question gets answered. Eventually people lose interest and it bubbles off the first page. Most folks don't go looking past the first page or two. Meaning, the thread dies by virtue of being everything being said an nobody posting replies anymore. A moderator doesn't need to do anything. Generally, a mod should be busy checking out complaints on threads because of violating forum rules. This thread violates no rules, thus asking a mod to close it only wastes their time (not a lot of time, but waste is waste). You haven't done anything wrong in asking your initial question, nor in asking to close the thread. It's merely a matter of protocol that you don't need to have your threads closed. As a point of fact, had your thread been closed to quickly, I wouldn't be able to add something new like this: the geolex URL seems to be for geocaching oriented topics. The following URL is for general internet slang, and will serve you all over the internet: http://www.internetslang.com/ Welcome to the boards.

That's probably the best advice. For a first time cacher, the "easiest" way to get going is also the most basic method: 1) use geocaching.com to identify a cache you want to hunt (say "Birds of a Feather" mentioned above) 2) enter the coords as a waypoint into your GPSr (read the manual) 3) set the GPSr to navigate to the waypoint you just entered 4) switch modes on the GPSr to put you in compass mode to show which direction and distance the waypoint is (once again, read the manual, the right mode has an arrow showing the way) 5) park the car near enough to the waypoint (use Google Maps, plus clues on the website) 6) walk to the waypoint, using the GPSr's needle to tell you which paths are the closest towards the waypoint 7) when the distance says "0" and the needle keeps swinging, you're at the 0 point. 8) start looking around in a 30' radius from the 0 point for a cache container There are fancy ways to do all of the above. However, all GPSr I've ever seen will let you do it as I show above. The key is, enter the waypoint correctly. Set your GPSr to navigate to that waypoint (as opposed to some other point). Then put it on compass mode, so you can see which way to head, and how far. The needle explains far more than "direction". Also, be aware, the GPSr usually doesn't know which way you're facing when you turn it on. Walk about 10 feet, then freeze. The compass needle will swing, as it now knows the direction you traveled, based on your starting and stopping position. Newer GPSr may work include a "real" compass to not have this problem, but it's good to verify anyway.

with my Magellan SporTrak, I always assumed an accuracy of up tp 30' Sounds like your iPhone is just as good. My experience is that multiple GPS of different makes can help (gives you a second opinion on finding the zero point). The iPhone is useful for getting to the general area, and looking up the cache page. I don't expect more from it, and wouldn't like to have it out much to get damaged in the woods.

I'd bet the biggest reason is that somebody at Groundspeak bought an iPhone 3g, owned a Mac, and downloaded apple's free SDK, and wrote their first app for iphone. If the developer owned a PocketPC phone, you can bet it would probably happen.

I like this list. It seems like a reasonable checklist to test a cache's quality. Certainly for a placer, considering to do a cache.

I concur. I do see Prime's point, though I believe he's being a bit harsh. It has always been my experience that helping to fix a damaged cache is a good thing. Had the cache been "normal' and the finder found it wet and cleaned it, everyone would be happy. Had the finder left it (not his), and gone home to archive it, what then? WHo goes back to clean it up? Just fixing unmaintained caches is one path. Archiving unmaintained caches is another. In any event, it would be awfully nice if somebody FIXED it or REMOVED it after geting it archived (requiring yet another trip). And I suspect removing a cache would come under equal flak. Personally, I'd be happy to maintain a cache, making multiple trips. I would not be happy to find somebody's unmaintained cache, have to leave it (so I don't steal it), contact the owner, wait for that to fail, request an SBA, wait for it to be archived, and then have to go back out to remove it, just to DO THE RIGHT THING. Bear in mind, if I'm going to shut down a cache, I'm prolly not interested in going through the hassle of making a new cache and posting it. fact is, a cache ought to have multiple contacts, in case the first one drops out. Fact is, there are folks who LIKE the adoption method, and the COMMUNITY ought to have a VOTE on whether they want that policy instituted in GC.COM's code.

if they find it, log it online, but don't sign it, people will complain because there's always some busybody backtracking paper logs they find with online logs, just to whine about other people. In the OP's scenario, the friends hunted the cache when given the coords by the hider. They found it. Yes, they were technically first to find, though they wanted to reserve the prizes AND the logs to someone from GC.com. They could have signed the log, took the swag, AND signed online. They also could have signed the top of the log that they tested the cache to ensure the FTF would find a good cache. In the end, since this is an open hobby, y'all should be happy there was a cache to find, with stuff in it, and they didn't crap in it.