woodsters

I do agree about the unverified email thing. I had a cacher post a DNF on my cahce the other day. Seriously, its a really simple 1/1 park and grab. But in light of what I had read here, I thought I would see about contacting her and offer some guidance in her new found hobby (no finds according to her profile). But of course, there is no way to contact her. All is listed is the unverified comment. So, I figured I might be able to make a difference to the next one that comes along. What I did is I went back and edited the description of my cache. I changed the "short description" to say... "If you are new to Geocaching, then please go to www.geocaching.com and read up on this great activity before setting out to seek your first cache. You will learn more of what it's all about, how to seek a cache, proper caching etiquette and more. You may also contact me through my profile and feel free to ask any questions you may have!" Could be worded better, but felt that maybe if one of them actually stops and reads it, that it may make a difference. If not, nothings changed.

Wow...that is pretty good. Took about 4 or 5 days for me to get some decals, log books and travel bug tags. But I just checked out your profile and see you are from their neck of the woods. I'm on the other side of the states..lol

According to what it says when you submit the hide, it says it could take up to 7 days. It several days for ours.

Hello, welcome to the conversation. I'd like to refer you back to page 1 of this thread where we discussed exact issue then quickly moved on more constructive conversation. The OP made a very accusatory post about all intro app users in his opinion ruining the hobby. When you read the first page you will see that the only person with that opinion was the OP. After his initial post the OP has not commented in this thread. Please don't judge a book by it's cover or this thread by it's title. Apparently there are some that still feel that inro app users are a problem by the post after mine on this page up above. Yes I posted after reading the initial posters response, which I assume the majority of those on the 16 pages (750+ postings) thus far must have done as well?

But people have to start somewhere. Whether it's an app or the website. What difference does it make if they come across the free app? They could come across the paid one and purchase it and still not know what they are doing. I was being facicious (sp?). I was talking about having the entire thing as a paid thing. That would be the only way to keep it straight...or at least more straight... and I as I mentioned, I said to leave it all alone and that's working out. If someone does have statisitics and proof that free app users are causing harm, then I would love for them to post it.

Or you can do like the user waldenrun did it or does it. Not sure if he still caches or not. But when I lived up in Massachusetss, he would print out maps and go off of those. No GPS used. And the last I had looked at his profile, he had 3000 finds. Met him once or twice on the trail or at an event. Can't remember exactly.

This. This is exactly how I do it. I will have to give this more of a try next time.

You really have been away for a while. Go to your profile page, scroll down about 10% and look for a link on the right side under "Premium Features" I knew that...lol The funny thing is that I have a notification already set up for new caches. ever thought to look in the list for events.. I think I saw event "cache" and the word cache threw me off... thanks

This isn't a good comparison because of the frequency of occurrence and intent. I don't have statistics but it's clear that there are far more clueless intro app user than there are "rogue" geocachers. Also what a "rogue" knows full well what he is doing is wrong. A clueless intro app user doesn't know that what they are doing is against geocaching societal norms or that their actions are having a negative impact on someone else's enjoyment of the game. Contacting a "rogue" geocacher will yield nothing all of the time. Contacting a clueless intro app user (which is often not possible due to Groundspeak requiring verifiable contact information for everyone EXCEPT intro app users) will, in most cases, yield positive results. You wouldn't be able to contact a Rogue cacher..because you won't know who it is...Unless they are an idiot and announce it. I could be one....you could be one.... As far as intro app users...how are you going to know they are intro app users? Search everyone's profile that searches for your cache? And as I mentioned, it doesn't matter if they are using a free app or the website. I have the paid for app on my phone. My wife has the intro app on her phone. She caches with me and every once in a while she and my daughter will do it without me while I sleep during the day (work at night). Is she killing the hobby because she uses the intro app? There are going to be clueless people none the less. The only way to keep this "more" on the up and up is to make it a paid membership thing solely. I think y'all are thinking too much about it. In my opinion, the sport seems to be going pretty well. 11 years ago, there was less than half the amount of caches out there. Far less micros for sure. People who had hides, had a handful of them. Now I come back and there are over 2 million caches. Great! I think there needs to be more worry about people with hundreds of hides. To me, that is more of hobby killer than anything else. Not a problem, if they were all great hides. But when they turn out to be used pill bottles, with an oversized generic Ziploc type of bag that doesn't seal, attached to a guardrail or under a light post skirt, to me that is more killing the hobby. I still go and find them. Hey I wanna get my numbers up too. It's not always about quantity....most of the time, it's about quality.

I was thinking the other day, what keeps a geocacher from getting angry, going rogue and stealing caches? Nothing. There's not much you can do about it. People don't need the app (whether free or not) to do as the OP described here. They can log on to the website and get the info and do it. Has nothing to do with an app.

I have the iPhone 4s. I find it works pretty well. I use the compass feature when I within that 528 ' range. I have noticed that it does take a while for it to settle, especially the faster you walk. But of course, the old Garmin I have does the same thing. I placed a cache recently, but did not use the phone for it. I used the Garmin. I've noticed on the GC app for the iPhone that the accuracy it says is just a little too much for me.

Where does one sign up for these notifications about events?

So let's look at what makes these moments awkward. One is that the CO's a jerk and thinks poorly of someone that files a legitimate request for a cache to be archived when it has a serious problem. As I say, I'm against changing the mechanism in a manner that suggests such behavior by a CO is something we should accept as normal. The other reason such a moment might be awkward is because the archive request was marginal, unclear, or even wrong. I want people filing archive requests to worry about this kind of awkward moment so that they are sure they only report the facts they actually have and avoid lapsing into opinions, such as the worth of the CO and his ability to maintain caches, for example. Indeed, I want someone filing an archive request to imagine they're standing face to face with the owner so they think about how their log is going to be received. Above all, when I meet the CO in real life, I want us to be able to have a rational discussion about the archive request. If we can't -- if it's awkward -- something's already wrong with our interaction that isn't fixed by him not knowing who I am. Normally a lot of it has to do with peoples lack of social skills. Either the person that gets mad doesn't know how to receive constructive criticism. Or people are afraid to give constructive criticism. In the long run, either of the two just hurts the activity of geocaching in the long run. How about making it that if you place a NA on a cache, that you are exempt from taking the place if the cache does in fact get archived. I think that might take some of the unecessary NA's out of the equation. I know there are probably plenty of people will be quick to mark one NA to just get the spot at the instant of a little maintenance in order to get the great spot. I do think there should be a limit of the number of caches that you own. If you reach the max amount and want to place another one, then you need to archive one of your others. There's over 2 millions caches worldwide. Thats double of what it was 10 years. I've yet to see someone with 2 million finds yet. So there's plenty out there to search for.

Other cachers can leave notes on the log stating that they fixed the issue. As I mentioned, eventually the cache can be adopted out. If the original cache owner is not around anymore, but the cache is a popular and good one, then I see no reason to archive it and have it gone. After all, who is going to physically go remove the cache? Leave the cache there and put another responsible party on it. And if the community keeps the caches going, then it should not really be much of an issue. Cachers should take some responsibility. Just as you are supposed to leave something of equal or greater value if you take something out of a cache, we should all leave a cache in as good or better condition than we found it. Just my honest opinion. Cachers can leave logs but the Needs Maintenance attribute remains until an Owner Maintenance is logged. So anyone filtering out caches that need maintenance will never see it, and in a busy location the logs showing the maintenance will soon disappear. The cache can't be adopted out without the owner's consent. Yes, but why not? If a cache owner is not replying to communication (especially from reviewers), then after a time period it would be nice to offer it up for adoption. What's the difference of archiving it and letting someone else have the space? If someone can take a cache and update it, then by all means. Or perhaps cachers should try and contact the cache owner and ask them to adopt it. Yeah, but it's evident that not everyone is going to take care of what was once a decent cache. Just like you can't stop people from putting out those "piece of junk" caches you mentioned. This is not for every cache. This is for those caches that are in great locations and have given a good expierence, but may need a little TLC. I hate finding crappy unattended caches myself. One issue I have is that if you place a NM on a cache, that they are given a month to correct it. The cache owner is expected to disable it until they can fix it, but they don't. It could be something so simple as the log was completed or wet. If a cacher had a piece of paper to put in it to continue the log and a baggy to protect it, then it would make it to where that cache is in poor health for what could be a month. Personally. I think the time needs to be knocked down to at least half that time. If you place a cache that you can not get to in a week or so, then it's too far out for you and you shouldn't of placed it in the first place. Whats the difference of archiving it and throwing someones property in the trash than assigning it to a different person? I agree

Or did the email say that your subscription had a month left and would expire on or thereabouts of the 26th of February?

I'm still astonished that peoples feelings will get hurt if someone posts a NM on their cache. I mean what do you do if someone posted a find on one of your caches, but said your cache sucked?

Other cachers can leave notes on the log stating that they fixed the issue. As I mentioned, eventually the cache can be adopted out. If the original cache owner is not around anymore, but the cache is a popular and good one, then I see no reason to archive it and have it gone. After all, who is going to physically go remove the cache? Leave the cache there and put another responsible party on it. And if the community keeps the caches going, then it should not really be much of an issue. Cachers should take some responsibility. Just as you are supposed to leave something of equal or greater value if you take something out of a cache, we should all leave a cache in as good or better condition than we found it. Just my honest opinion.

Agreed! I remember many moons ago that it was promoted here that we help out others with their caches. That if we come across a cache with wet contents, that we try to dry it out as much as possible. If it needs a new log, we put one in it. If it needs a new baggy to keep things dry, we put on it. I have a bag (small backpack type) that I carry with me when caching. Inside it is extra printed logs, tape, and a couple sizes of small baggies. If I come across a cache that needs a little TLC, then I will help it out as much as possible. I will let the cache owner know what I did. That way, they can decide to go and fix it to their liking or let it go the way I took care of it. If there is a cache and the owner seems to not be around anymore, then I see no reason for the cache to not go on. The community can help take care of it. It makes no difference whose name is labeled with it. Now perhaps if the owner is not responding to the reviewers, then maybe they should be able to make it to where it is adopted out to another active cacher. Then the cacher can replace the cache as they feel needed. But it's all about community in my book. I have a couple caches up in massachusetts that I placed over 10 years ago and adopted them out to another cacher when I left 10 years ago. They are still going strong. I often go and check their pages online to see how they are going and will often leave a note expressing how I am happy people are still enjoying those caches.

150? And to boot you mention that some of them are far or out of the way. I know you said you would if needed and agree that some people may mention a needs maintenance for small things. But I think that is where the CO needs to contact the person who marked it and get the particulars that are note mentioned in the note. And still, 150? That's a prime example of where others could place caches themselves. I do think there should be a limit. And on that cache you mentioned that the poster connie made a NM remark based on another cachers comment, I agree. She should not of made that comment. But I did notice that it took you over two months to post a response to it.

Mark it as needs maintenance if that's what it needs. If its been marked that several times and/or has been a period of time and it hasn't been taken care of, then mark it needs archived. If it goes like that for a period of time and still nothing, then message the local reviewer and express your concern about it. But I would attempt to try and contact the cache owner first and see if you can get them off their butt first.

I agree that is the current system. It just isn't working as you describe in this area. I frequently come upon crappy, degraded caches. Some CO's have 1/3d of their caches listed as needs maintenance. The caches persist. Oh, and I see the time-out thing as in addition to the current system. A fall-back. I think the system is fine if people would grow a pair of balls and not be afraid to mark a cache as needing maintenance. What's the big deal about marking a cache like that? As a cache owner (1 now and a couple that I had adopted out years ago), I rely on those postings. Those will get my attention more so than a statement hidden amongst a found log that says log is wet or something. It doesn't hurt my feelings one bit. I would rather see them limit the number of caches that someone could place. Seriously, there are people with hundreds of owned caches. Not saying that they can't maintain them, but it does take the fun out of it when someone hides a hundred caches in used pill bottles under parking lot light skirts almost every 528 feet. Maybe someone else out there could do a better hide within that 528 feet. Or maybe that a cache owner can not have a cache within a certain distance of one of their own caches. Lengthen out the 528 feet to 5280 feet. Meaning I can't place a cache within a mile of another cache I own.

I think some people might be playing with their "O rings" too much. It's just a container. I asked if anyone used the plastic inserts as a seperate container. Nothing more.

I placed the cache without the plastic tube. We will see how it goes. If it doesn't work out, I will replace it.

How?

The ones I ordered through amazon were actually labeled as pill containers. I went to he bison designs website and noticed that their capsules are noted as geocaching containers. So maybe I should actually note these as "pill containers that look like bison tubes". Lmao And at $5.99 for 5 of them with free shipping, I will take my chance.