Dr. House

Or unique cache containers that have been custom made. Agreed, to a certain extent. Perhaps the first of that custom container type would get "favorited" by me, since, after that, it's no longer unique. I'm still slowly going through my history assigning points and I'm also skipping archived caches for that reason. Which leads to this next question. Would you take back points from an archived cache if you were out and really wanted to favorite one you just found? Hasn't happened to me yet, but I believe I will retract them. I have plenty to go around, and while it doesn't really hurt to leave them posted to an archived cache, I'm just not sure what purpose it would serve to leave them there. Perhaps there's some validity to offering them to archived caches from the standpoint that some cacher may stumble through someone's profile and discover that a cache used to be placed in an area where currently none exists, but that seems sorta far fetched in today's game.

Great! It would be rather arrogant of me to expect you to log any other way.

Now that 2 weeks have passed since the introduction of the "Favorite Points" feature, and many people who are able to utilize this feature have had a chance to exercise their ability to do so, I'm curious to hear what criteria people use when they choose to give a point to a cache. Thusfar, I've chosen to offer a few points to caches that offered at least one of a few things: Nice scenery Fun with friends Inherent uniqueness (of a puzzle or location) Effort required to log a find ...I'm sure there are more, I just can't think of them now. I've also chosen not to assign favorite points to caches that have been archived. I've enjoyed many caches that are now archived and have stated as much in my found log, but I just don't feel I should "favorite" something that is no longer searchable. So, let's discuss. How have you chosen to use this feature?

I'm not sure I've ever seen a post in the forums that I've agreed with more than this one. I'd even give it a favorite point if I could. My hat's off to you. For my placed caches, I've taken the stance that I am not deserving of anything, and any cacher may choose to log their experience in any manner they feel sufficient. The notion that a cache owner is somehow entitled to anything more than what a cacher has logged on their cache, regardless of effort involved in putting together that cache, is despicable to me. Similarly, for my found caches, I try to write something unique for each log, and try to avoid a log that simply says "TFTC" (or the like), though I would log that regardless of the effort involved in finding the cache if I wanted and would not fear repercussion in doing so. That's just my personal ethic.

I have same complaint. I actually went back to make sure that the metric units was still my choice, and they are, but my stats display in imperial units. Need bug fix. Nate has addressed this concern so that those who have a preference can select it in a future release. Until then, we'll need to be patient.

Ah right... this makes sense now. Thanks for the explanation.

These are BETA maps, the additional functionality is coming in the next months, think that is what the opening post showed or maybe even the popup shows 9.01 and 9.02 if you scroll right. Odd I have a different issue. I see all caches, found or not, except PMO caches. I am signed in so the system should know to show them. Just commenting since I haven't seen it discussed anywhere else. I can duplicate this issue. IE8 Vista Home Premium SP2 Safari 5.0.3 on the same system

Yes. You may go to "Your Account Details" to turn it off.

Awesome news. This means two things: No more driving an extra 72578934km to get to where you wanna go A new cache will be placed nearby to show off the new bridge any day now

Thank you for that information, but telling everyone about events here will also let anyone coming to the area from other places know about potential events during there visits ! Absolutely! And the forums are also a great place to organize some group caching. or Nyom!!! As a good friend would say. CD Completely hilarious!

One of these is a real geocache... the rest are decoys

Hamilton is lovely, Urkel, but I'm not sure they have anything there that compares to your Earthcache

Cool! Good news indeed!

It's unfortunate that an out-of-country cacher asks a simple question of fellow cachers in the country he's looking to visit and gets subjective, personal commentary that does very little (read: nothing) to answer his question. Instead of simply discussing the hotel options available to the individual after narrowing down the location he's looking to visit, many participants chose to partake in some sort of pissing match about whose opinion is correct that, quite frankly, at the end of the day seems more akin to kindergarteners fighting amongst each other about whose dad could beat up the other person's dad. I can only imagine what opinion this cacher now has of Canadian cachers and how sorry they must feel to have even bothered to attempt to use this forum for assistance. And that's a shame on us. I've met you (speaking specifically to narcissa and Taoiseach), and recognize you to be adults with strong opinions about this little hobby/game we adore, among other things, but seriously, can't you at least try to channel those big brains of yours toward bettering everyone's experience instead of having a verbal slap fight demanding your off-topic opinion be considered correct? Not that it matters, but I, too, lived a period of my life in Windsor, and enjoyed it very much. So much so that I took time to revisit the city on a two-day caching trip a couple years back only to find that geocaching brought me to so many areas that were beautiful when I left but even moreso when I returned. So, respectfully, your 15 minutes are up. Nobody here seems to buy your opinion, and it's too bad you couldn't recognize that before people started making fun of you for it. It's one thing to feel strong about your opinions and convictions, but it takes moxie to actually know when to assert them. Stop the BS. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To mjholley, my personal preference for hotels in Canada are name brand chains (Howard Johnson, Clarion, Best Western) where the quality of service and accomodations is more likely to be quite decent no matter which one you end up staying at nation-wide. I'm truly not sure how many of those brands will be available in Northern Ontario, but should you be staying in some of the larger areas (i.e. Thunder Bay, Sault Sainte Marie, etc.) I'm reasonably certain that one of those will exist.

I can understand blowing up objects attached to bridges and around areas that could be seen as "security sensitive" (power plants or government buildings come to mind), but why would some entity target a tree? I can understand the arguement of "one day it'll be real" to a certain point, but I can't see the strategic importance of some random tree in a Walmart parking lot, necessitating a bomb squad to blow it up. I'm with Keith on this one... sometimes I just think they enjoy blowing crap up.

The finding of that cache should probably not be done from the side of the fence that the new arena now resides, but rather from a little access road just north of Bridge Street on Victoria Avenue. It's on the right-hand side and loops under the Victoria St. overpass. I believe it's some sort of old access road for the tracks that used to operate through there but now get you to the trails instead. As for why the maps are like that, I'd imagine it has something to do with focusing on large cities primarily and then looking at outlying areas afterwards, though I truly don't know. Cachers in this area do tend to prefer their caches be placed in parkland or on the Bruce Trail, and those areas haven't changed much, so maybe that's another reason for the outdated maps

Niagara Region has one by The Blue Quasar if you're looking to come a little further south. This is the only one in Ontario at the time: http://coord.info/GC225X0 Thanks 'pig! I was in a hurry that day and forgot to come back when I had time to post the link.

Niagara Region has one by The Blue Quasar if you're looking to come a little further south.

Judging by the maps on their profile, 3-Bearss have found a cache in each of the census divisions of Ontario, and are the first cachers I'm aware of that qualify for Juicepig's cache. Quite the feat... congrats!

The only thing I've personally experienced is a 10-15 second lag when I log anything on a cache and simultaneously drop a trackable with it... Initially I thought it was always going to timeout and I was going to hit submit again, but feared it would make duplicate logs, too. I'm really surprised nobody else has noticed/commented on this, so perhaps it's just me. I just imagine that some of the dupes are a result of repeatedly hitting "post" until the page loads and wonder if the thing I'm experiencing is related. That would be the geocaching.com servers, not the forums, but thanks... I did see your post on that issue. Thanks for confirming they aren't related. I assumed they weren't but wasn't really wasn't sure .

The only thing I've personally experienced is a 10-15 second lag when I log anything on a cache and simultaneously drop a trackable with it... Initially I thought it was always going to timeout and I was going to hit submit again, but feared it would make duplicate logs, too. I'm really surprised nobody else has noticed/commented on this, so perhaps it's just me. I just imagine that some of the dupes are a result of repeatedly hitting "post" until the page loads and wonder if the thing I'm experiencing is related.

I've discovered that if I choose not to drop any TB's into a cache that I've found, the recap page will display almost instantly. So I'm wondering if there's some sort of back-end process (between trackable database and geocache database, assuming those exist separately) that isn't talking happily to each other and thus causing the latency? I can also replicate the lag that I'm seeing with a found log w/Trackable drop on Safari 5.0 for Windows if that helps any. Hope this helps!

Also noticed this error message at the bottom left-hand corner of the browser window: Webpage error details User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0; Trident/4.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; OfficeLiveConnector.1.5; OfficeLivePatch.1.3; .NET4.0C) Timestamp: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:24:08 UTC Message: 'oD[...].value' is null or not an object Line: 73 Char: 30 Code: 0 URI: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?ID=604421

Has anyone else had this problem since the new release? After submitting a log entry (I've solely been doing "Found" logs, but perhaps this happens for other log types?) the page just kinda sits and tries to load the recap page. This process takes at least 10 to 15 seconds every single time I submit a log before the site will finally go to the recap. Since I'm logging a personal TB into every single cache I find, I am also finding that I'll get that notification almost instantly, thus I realize that the site is working behind the scenes, but far slower than any other submission page (TB retrieval, for instance). I'm using Vista Home Premium SP2 with IE8. I've posted this in the "Get Satisfaction" page also, but in case it gets overlooked, I wanted to place it here too.