ChileHead

Try using chrome or Firefox instead of internet explorer, if you are.

LOL!! I can't believe I'm not on the list! Maybe if you were nice to your local Reviewer he could hook you up. I pissed off his wife, so now I'm on his bad side.

LOL!! I can't believe I'm not on the list!

You seem to have a Draconian attitude to situations that don't meet every minute detail of the Guidelines. Maybe it was an oversight by the CO not putting a stamp in it, but unilaterally deciding it Needs Maintenance / Archive is a little severe. And trying to drum up support for your view point isn't constructive. There are individuals who have built up such a reputation that any reports they make on caches are largely ignored.

Did you post your dnf? Is there a history of dnfs before you? Sometimes caches are just hard to find, it may be there! Do not place a replacement cache! Log your dnf which lets the cache owner know. If it looks like it's been ignored for a while, post a needs maintenance.

Where are you going in the Adirondacks? I may be able to offer some suggestions for caches. I've been looking to get this one for a decade (https://coord.info/GCE152) as it's one of the few remaining travelling caches, but it's never where I am at the same time.

Personally if I came across an issue with angry land owners, I'd post a needs archived on the problem caches *and* follow up with the cache owner. I'd rather have the cache archived quickly by the reviewer to prevent any further problems and work the permission thing out in the background with the cache owner.

I have one letterbox I've put out and it uses GPS for the first waypoint, and then uses more traditional letterbox clues (take 20 paces, turn right at the forked tree, ...) to find the final. I always thought a letterbox hybrid should actually be found using letterbox style clues, as well as GPS, though very few seem to be set up that way. The way we have them listed on geocaching.com it would make more sense to have an attribute for a letterbox stamp, and then let the cache type reflect the actual cache part.

A scrolling marquee ... why not add multicolored blinking text and flames as well?

Another option is to open up all non PMO caches, but they can see details of only 1 or 2 or 3 per day. This is a common strategery for online newspapers. I can read 2 or 3 articles per day, before having to login with my paid subscription.

I am concerned that this kind of thing would just incite false logs. +1 Since they are generally using the app in the field near the cache, I'd only count those caches that are logged within some specified distance of the cache. This wouldn't eliminate false logs, but it would at least require the cacher to be near the cache they claimed to have found - so just assume a log in the field near the cache is good. They can still see all the non PMO caches on the website, with coordinates. So all they have to do is enter the coords into the app (or another GPS app) and they can cache like us old timers used to in the pre smart phone days.

If someone is motivated enough to use the full website, why limit them? Exactly. Limit access to those who haven't spent the time to login to the website and get a better feel for what this is all about. But if they look at my cache page and have the knowledge to program the coordinates in by hand to their phone or GPS, then I'm fine with them looking for my cache. They have at least done a bit of research.

I'm happy that there is some limitation on new members. In the old days people had to make an investment into a hand held, find the website, read the rules, manually load coords into a GPS ... the barrier to entry was a bit higher so people had a bit of commitment before they could start. Now all it takes is finding out about the game, and downloading an app. It's way too easy to start without understanding the rules. I've had a few caches go missing because of kids (or adults!) not understanding that you have to replace the cache, or rehide the cache properly. I've adjusted the D/T of some of my hides to make sure that new members cannot see them, or I make them premium. It would be nice though to open up the app a bit once people show a bit of commitment. Maybe after a month or 20 finds or something, they get to see higher D/T. One of the letterboxing sites does this ... you can make your caches available to members only after they have 50 or 100 or whatever finds. It's not perfect, but it does allow cache owners to protect themselves against a 10 year old who downloaded the app and doesn't have a clue.

To my knowledge no such challenge exists in our area That would likely have not been verifiable, and our reviewer wouldn't have published it.

I don't think I've ever cared what town or city or whatever I was in. It's not like I've been banned from certain municipalities and need to avoid stepping inside them. It doesn't help with cache route planning.

The mailing address for the park is Newark. What is the issue here? Are you finding geocaches with a GPS or some sort of mapbook? Finding geocaches with a GPS. But since it's not in Newark, Newark offices won't have information or police coverage of the park. How do you let the police know where you are going to be if the cache page doesn't list a town, village, hamlet, etc?

Maybe you should post a needs archived for that. That could really mess up your cache planning.

Application Programming Interface ... basically the way the app talks to the website.

Delete the find

Doesn't necessarily mean it's a fake cache page, could be a simple mistake. If you planted a cache in many parts of Russia, but accidentally entered the co-ords with a W rather than an E then there's a good chance that it would show up as being in Canada..... From the retraction note, that appears to be the case.

Please see: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=339292

Google chrome on Android recently changed and no longer permits use of geolocation to non-https sites. My mobile Waymarking site was still using http due to a case of laziness to get it done right. I had to update my site to use https, specifically for my intercaching.com site, but that broke Waymarking which wasn't using https and I hadn't gotten around to checking it. But all should be good now. Please use the following for mobile Waymarking: https://geotrailsw.com/wm (spelling Waymarking out works as well, but the forums insist on capitalization so I just use the shorter version of wm) I had a version on another test site of mine (www.chilehead.us) but something broke there preventing you from staying logged in, and I never bothered figuring out why, so please use the link above.

I'm not sure what problem the OP is trying to solve. After reviewing tens of thousands of caches (or more?) I can say that the number of problems a physical in person review would solve, is slim to non existent. There have been a few where cache owners have been deceitful, or when cache owners have bad coordinates, but these usually become visible within days of publication. You see, we already have an arm of volunteers who check these things. They are called the FTFers.

Harder? Not sure I agree with that. The strategy will make it easier in some ways as there will be less grey areas - I hope! - on what makes an acceptable challenge. There will be more work to get a checker written, unless there is already a generic one. But there should be less back and forth with the reviewer and appeals when a challenge cache isn't deemed appropriate. I would not assume that there was some poor guy at HQ toiling away for the past year on a solution. I'm sure it was a background activity along with everything else. As with any business, there are always tasks on the backlog that need to get done. Add the challenge into that list, prioritize it against all the other items, and it probably didn't make it to #1.

That must have been right after I posted in the CC thread that one year had passed. That's it. After your post an emergency meeting at Groundspeak was called. "'on4bam' posted they need a status, stat!" So the founders and all free lackeys had a pow-wow so they could quickly put together a rushed statement in the hopes of satisfying on4bam. Status was given after a year, I think that's fair. And no, you can't compare GS to Apple. GS doesn't have the resources to make date commitments to an ill defined product.