lrosell

*deleted double posting*

I think I'd pass on a rating system as well. What is a crappy cache to some cachers could be the next ones 5-Star. Geocaching is a lot of different things to a lot of very different people. As such a compiled rating on a cache might be missleading at best, depending on the various viewpoints and caching perspectives of those who have rated the cache.

Why not just filter out the Micros in a PQ, and keep Small, Regular, Large and the dreaded Unknown cache sizes?

I'd say that depends on the size of the film canister. A Panavision reel film canister could hold quite a lot whereas a 35mm not so much. Possibly not much more than a hamster tail.

This would my humble contribution, when out doing the FTF hound thing and quickly grab a micro. Not soo much... http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...31-c2ede58bb7d7

on a handheld unit you typically mark a waypoint and then CHANGE the coords on that waypoint. on a car GPS you usually have a section under the DRive To menu where you can input coords directly.

yup, it worked...

There's no shame in DNF's; they still got me out of the house! Any thing, mostly caches, that I don't find, is a DNF. Sometimes things like parking space, right-foot socks and free lunches may also be DNF's...

It looks like several people found your caches? some caches get found a lot, some don't. Who knows?

Ow man, honest to Pete... I was getting on here to rant about poor cache logs, in my case a bunch of nothing but smileys, and there's already a rant on here. Crud... I liked the idea about just putting a color or similar, only thing is that on the wap site and on GPSr's such as Colorado and Oregon the actual code would show up. And that would be WAAAAY to long. Confusing and funny but way to long....