ecanderson

If you want to keep some topo ability along with the street map, consider this >> http://www.gmaptool.eu/en/content/usa-osm-topo-routable You get the OSM maps with a topo overlay.

I am trying to understand "not taken". They show up as not found on the AL app map? Or they do not show up at all on the map? If they show up as not found, and you still have your answers, there is a solution for that.

Yup. $199.46 with tax, shipped free, direct from Olathe from our friends at Garmin. If this one is still available, I'd recommend it to the OP in a heartbeat:

I've always been annoyed that COs are also notified of edited logs by email.

Due to COVID, event caches are in short supply right now depending upon where you live. Seems like each county has its own threshold and move up and down all the time. Once we get over this, you'll start to see them pop up again. You will see them on the search map as little white bubbles with red horizontal lines.

Changing location won't have any impact on previous finders. That information can be edited at any time. Because no previous searcher would expect this solution, it would have to be carefully explained in the description for the stage, or people will have difficulty understanding that they must see information in one location and report it in another.

Ah, I was thinking of GC4X487. Different cache with different history - but sounds like same outcome.

What's even stranger are the two found logs a day before yours that don't mention condition at all. Take a look at the 7/4 log. Did the person leaving the new container also leave the old one behind for you to find, or ??? I'm confused.

I don't know about what is happening down south, but up in the Front Range area of northern Colorado, we haven't been doing any Zoom meetings. Until we went back to red level recently in all counties up here, we were still having small outdoor events (e.g., morning coffee).

If I run across a problem like this, and there's nothing wrong with the container, just a problem with the technique of the previous finder (e.g., poor closure of an otherwise proper container), I'll do what I can to help the COs out regarding the log, and let them know a) the nature of the problem, and b) what was done to remedy it. Even the closure of a 30 cal can be botched by a novice. Why not pitch in?

Slick. Bookmarked! Thanks for that. Really interesting to sort the list by DateCompletedUtc / Username (there's time hiding in the DateCompltedUtc column) to observe the order in which people have chosen to run my series (it's asequential). I'm seeing enough commonality in that to where I may choose to reorder the series in the way that the majority are finding them, though I guess it depends upon their direction of approach to/in town. It would be really swell if the developers would move their butts over HERE to the official corporate forum instead of asking us to use some 3rd party site to conduct their business. I'm surprised that GCHQ didn't mandate that from the beginning. What's the world coming to? (We don't need no steeeenking Facebook!)

Wow - would that ever screw up the FTF hounds!

You won't be able to keep the silicone uniform enough to provide a seal anywhere near as good as the original unless you've got a way to maintain the thickness somehow. If you really want to keep the water out when it's left upside down in your cache space, the rubber stripping from McMaster plus a little of that silicone to deal with any gaps between the pieces is still, to my mind, the best way to go. Then again, as cheaply as these cans can be had from surplus sometimes, gotta wonder if it's worth it to rehab one unless there's already something else special about it (camo, locking tricks, etc.),

Or perhaps what remains of throttled European 2G GSM connections. They say France will still support it until 2030.

Guess I hadn't noticed that when I built mine, and it's been a while. Apart from those who want to try to do their bonus cache reveal in the 5th journal, what's the point? (And that doesn't even work properly). I scattered my bonus cache info through all 5 stages, and left it asequential.

Unfortunately, most here leave the setting on the sequential default, so we have many ALs that must be followed sequentially that as easily be 'random access'. When a finder is mixing in AL searches with regular cache searches for a day's caching run, it's a bit of a bummer not to be able to properly plan routing when there's no particular reason for the sequenced ALs. At least you can see the other circles beyond step 1 (if you look REALLY closely at the map), so there's at least a clue where the individual steps might be, but it would be much nicer to know the correct order in advance, if order actually makes sense.

Not sure it's allowed that there be required interaction with the CO in order to find any 'real' cache, including an AL bonus. The actual rule is No contact required Caches cannot require geocachers to contact the cache owner or anyone else. but it may also be applied in reverse by reviewers.

+1 to that last post. Am recording yesterday's logs, and all DNF are coming up Found, but at least it's something that can be changed again.

Indeed, and back to the original meaning of the phrase, the elevation above ground zero was just that - elevation above ground zero. The elevation itself didn't define the location.

Unclear to me whether the problem is page related or if it's an issue with the log parser throwing back the wrong result to the browser. Could be coming from either end.

I suspect GC would like to know what the error message said. "It's broke" is sometimes hard to identify, and especially hard to fix. I'm sure it would also be helpful to give them just a little clue about the browser you're using when the error is generated. FWIW, also loading fine here today. Firefox 82.0.3 on Win10.

@The Snowdog Sounds like your provider is performing something called "throttling" or "deferral" of email from GCHQ servers. Better than blocking email altogether, but still not helpful. Some wise words from a knowledgeable source: Think of your domain reputation as a “credit score.” A higher score (from good email practices, data, and engagement) means more consistent inbox placement — and more eyes on your emails. If your domain has a negative history (spam complaints, low opens, higher-than-acceptable bounce rates, spam trap hits), then your score goes down. As a result, you’ll run into issues like spam folder placement, increased throttling, or even blocks from the mailbox provider. [Users here are seeing all 3 of these symptoms]. Rehabilitating domain reputation is not an overnight process. Depending on the severity of the deliverability issues, reputation resets can take anywhere from a couple of weeks, to multiple months. How long it takes to rebuild your domain reputation depends on your negative metrics (spam complaints, hard bounces, low engagement, spam trap hits) and sending history. A good timeline for improving your domain reputation would be around 30-45 days, but is dependent on the changes you have implemented to your business practices and how those changes are perceived by mailbox providers. A negative domain reputation can come from something as simple as too high of a hard bounce (invalid email) rate over time. It may be tempting to email everyone on your list as much as possible, but using little or no segmentation or not having a sunsetting protocol in place to remove inactive recipients can have consequences for your reputation. Furthermore, you need to have strong sign-up practices in place such as double opt-in to help prevent false and potentially risky data from entering your lists and causing reputation issues down the line. ActiveCampaign has a tool which can help you track, tag, and separate your contacts to help you focus your efforts on specific segments and devise a complementary sending strategy. To learn more about tracking contact engagement, check out this help article. Over time, recipient addresses can be used as spam traps or honeypots, and sending to those addresses can negatively impact your reputation even further. Having good data gives you a better chance of reaching more recipients, and can help build stronger engagement. For a deeper dive on engagement, and how to keep reputation high with good open rates, we put together an article on email engagement and deliverability.

Yeah, says the person who lives where that first snow in September is the last to melt in April! (ex. Binghamtonite here).

I'm getting all of my notifications, too ... using Comcast. This may well turn out to be another of those provider-specific issues where one or more providers aren't happy with the amount of undeliverable email they're getting from GCHQ. A large privately held retailer was having similar problems on an ongoing basis, all related to 'reputation' as determined by various providers' servers. Making use of the email server logs, we were able to require re-authentication of a lot of email accounts whose email had been deemed undeliverable. Those that didn't re-authenticate were quickly culled, and the reputation problem was finally resolved.

"Senior" national park passes here are 8X the cost of just a couple of years ago. Of course, that gets you into a lot of territory here in the U.S., so I don't begrudge them that. However, a little county park with an $12 per visit park pass for a 10 minute visit is a little excessive. Definitely not 'charity' as they're using county taxes to help pay for the upkeep. If we planned to spend the day there making actual use of their facilities, there wouldn't be a complaint, but when we're on a cache run, we usually don't bring our fishing poles or jet skis.