Jump to content

SeattleWayne

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    479
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SeattleWayne

  1. Not about my fellow geocachers, no. About people? Yes. Sometimes as people we get caught up in the moment and may or may not realize what we are doing or where we are parking our vehicles.
  2. One can not break a guideline. A guideline is a basic rule of thumb or a suggestive direction. At best a recommendation. A guideline is not law.
  3. No, because they are guidelines. That's the point I'm trying to make, on4bam. If Grand Central says, "Yes, come have a Geocaching event here" why would Groundspeak say no? Just because of their "wording"?
  4. As long as you fill out this form (http://www.grandcentralterminal.com/info/eventplanning#hostyourevent) and it gets approved, I'm sure it wouldn't be an issue.
  5. I guess if that's what you require to hide a cache instead of using good judgment on distance then so be it.
  6. Guidelines are not black and white strict policy or law. Guidelines allow for some leniency and common sense. Does Groundspeak really need to spell it out for you and tell you not to hide a cache on the tarmac or in the belly of a 747? "Please do not hide caches near or around railroad crossings." "Please do not hide caches 200 feet from a railroad crossing." Both say the same thing.
  7. Why one would decide to over-extend themselves with hides and turn their hobby into a full-time job is beyond me.
  8. Looks like some cachers have decided to drop throw downs on this one to claim the find.
  9. Yes, I have noticed. That's why I stated that logging a find on this one wasn't very promising.
  10. Now that is cool, and unfortunate that it's probably too dangerous to go after.
  11. Impressive stats, to say the least. Obviously, you have more experience than I when it comes to hiding caches, and when to do maintenance and when not to. But I think I would've handled this differently. A broken latch isn't going to magically fix itself, and surely just because the next bunch of cachers roll through and say everything is a-okay with the cache, doesn't mean everything is a-okay with the cache. I'm just assuming here, but the reason cachers decided not to say anything about the broken latch is because someone had already logged a NM about it. So why would the next bunch of cachers come through and further pester you with more NM logs about a broken latch? I'm assuming (again) that the cachers think that you're aware of the issue and have made plans to do something about it. Me, personally, I would've made a trip out to confirm or deny the problem with the cache, and if nothing is wrong, so be it. That's why I keep my caches within easy driving distance so I am not burdened with petty NM logs. I'm not saying your caches are far away, I'm just saying I'm not going to overreach myself with too many caches that are too far from home base. You left a NM on your cache for almost four years with no action. If I come across a cache that has problems, and a NM has already been logged, I will log it again. Not all cachers cache like that, though. A lot of cachers cache with their phones and probably don't know how, or care to, log a NM. Some old school cachers cache with their GPS and maybe write field notes on busted up caches, and have intentions to log a NM when they get home and forget. There are so many variables as to why no one besides that one cacher didn't log a NM. To each their own, I say and cache on! That is all.
  12. Williams Island (GC60BX6) placed in Alert, in the Qikiqtaaluk Region, Nunavut, Canada, is the Northern most placed cache in the whole wide world. I've began researching how to get there, and it doesn't look promising. What're your plans to log a find on this cache?
  13. I doubt Groundspeak has a vision of power trails being the future for geocaching.
  14. Why? Aren't Little Free Library caches just traditionals?
  15. No, I would not be upset at all if Groundspeak came up with the attribute. If that's what the people want, I'm cool with it. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter to me because I'm going to try to find caches regardless of what attributes they have.
  16. I'm not the one who wants a new attribute so it doesn't matter all that much to me.
  17. Yes technically, and necessarily. Why call it a power trail if it isn't on a trail? If it's not on a trail then it's not a power trail.
  18. I bet if you were one of the 4,000 that received a Virtual award you'd be saying the Algorithm was perfect, and the email Groundspeak sent out was magical and explained everything you needed/wanted to know.
  19. I seriously doubt Groundspeak purposely tried to upset people regarding the new Virtual Caches thing. I'm sure when this thing was to be rolled out, most already had some foresight that people were going to be mad that they didn't get a reward. It is what it is. Complaining to HQ about it, disabling and archiving your own caches is childish.
  20. Obviously power trails are on a trail. If you have to go beyond the trail to get other caches then those are not on the power trail. At the end of the day who cares. The point is to find caches. I pre-plan my routes most of the time. So when I see a long string of caches I already know it's a PT.
  21. Power trails are pretty distinguishable on the map.
×
×
  • Create New...