as77

That's because the cache owner had a Magellan, too, which was 30ft off when he placed the cache, therefore the coordinates are inaccurate. The Garmin takes your friend to the actual coordinates, while you are 30ft off but the cache is there.

Maybe there is a cache under my desk... let's look... oops, there is no cache there. Now I can go log DNFs for all caches on the website... huh, that's gonna take some time.

Zoos have a social agenda (let people know the animals), so strictly speaking they should not be allowed. But then again, caching itself can be considered a social agenda, too So this "social agenda" part of the rules is questionable.

Open a thread in the "Geocaching.com web site" forums, with the title "License agreement page broken" or something like that. They will notice it sooner that this.

You have a very binary way of thinking. ) OK, then I'll pick a cache in California, start to look for it here in NY and then post a DNF for it. Looked for it, didn't find it, it's a DNF, right?

Bringing my post from the other thread: I have recently found a travel bug which came with instructions to take it to a certain place (some business, I guess) between 9am-5pm from Monday to Friday and then I will get a $5 Subway gift certificate. But I'm not forced to go there, I can just drop the TB in another cache without going for the gift certificate. However, this TB seems to be of somewhat commercial nature. The TB page has the Subway logo on it. Is this allowed?

If you are caught with the cache box then explain. There are also nice flyers on www.geocacher-u.com that you can print and distribute. Otherwise, it is advisable to keep silent about what you are doing, especially if you think that the muggles might find and plunder the cache afterwards. As a rule, muggles should not know where a cache is hidden.

(post moved to another thread)

In this case the DNF is actually misleading because people might think that it was the new location where he didn't find it. Someone may not read the log, just see that the last log is a DNF and decide not to go for the cache. Therefore I strongly recommend changing that DNF to a note, saying: "I went to the old location by mistake and of course I couldn't find it there" or something similar. A DNF has a twofold purpose: it either indicates that you had some difficulty or it indicates that the cache might not be there. Now if it is already known and indicated that the cache is not there but it is elsewhere then a DNF is not appropriate in my opinion. You can provide the same information in a note, avoiding the misleading part of information that a DNF icon carries.

After 72 finds I still feel the same thing I always clip the GPS back onto my belt under my shirt when other people are approaching. And I have never met another cacher, or if yes, I did not realize that they were cachers and neither did they that I was.

If you didn't find it because in fact it wasn't there and this was already known then maybe it's OK to change the previous DNF to a note. And then of course go for the cache at the new location.

TeddyTexas, please lock this thread in favor of the other one you opened.

Actually what you'd have to do is to persuade Mapopolis to release the format specification of their maplet files (and preferably a programming library to write them). Several people have tried this, no success so far.

Since it's a binary format, it would be very hard to figure it out.

No, I don't know about that.

There is a program called GPXtoMaplet to do that. GSAK cannot do this because the maplet file format specification is not public and has not yet been figured out by anyone.

Even though it has a patch antenna, its reception is very good because that antenna is a big one. Remember: it's not the type of the antenna but the effective size of the antenna that counts. The iFinder's reception is at least as good as that of the Magellans with a quad antenna.

The Legend usually has poor reception under heavy tree cover mainly because it has a small patch antenna. Most Magellans have quad helix antennas that have much better reception than the patch antennas in Garmin Etrex units. However, the Explorists are an exception. The Explorist models have patch antennas. I have no personal experience with them but it's quite likely that their reception is poorer than that of the other Magellans with quad helix antennas. From the Magellan line, I would recommend one of the Sportraks instead: price about the same, good reception, PC connection. From the Garmin line in this price range, the GPS 72 and the Rino 110 have good reception.

sorry, TeamMenoss, I just realized you are a female (at least your profile page makes me think so), so I should have written "her" instead of "him".

As you see, I replied to Brian.

You are not being nice. What you wrote here almost sounds like you are accusing him of stealing. I think it is fair from a non-paying member to comment that he wouldn't pay for a service that is almost useless when one would like to use it most. The $3/month is not a donation to Groundspeak so that they can hopefully improve their service. It is the fee for the existing service. If the service is bad then it's not worth the fee. I have just become a paying member but if the service continues to deteriorate I will go back to non-paying again.

Non-paying members do contribute, too. They hide caches, they log finds (thereby keeping others informed about the status of the caches), etc. They keep up the activity. Without them, Groundspeak could not exist. It is very misguided to represent non-paying members as cheapskates who just want a free lunch. That said, I have recently upgraded my membership. But for my money I expect at least satisfactory performance of the server even during weekends.

The hardware should be able to handle the high weekend loads. If it's not (and apparently this is the case) then it should be upgraded.

I'm getting this all the time. I can't even log my finds. Time to upgrade the hardware, Groundspeak!

The 60cs is not as big as it seems from the measurements because the antenna is counted in the height. If you want a gps with good reception under tree cover, you probably won't get any smaller than this.