Morning Dew
-
Posts
135 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Morning Dew
-
-
What type of hides your seeking would go a long ways in helping others make some suggestions.
Are you looking for:
A big number of finds
Hiking caches
Famous caches
Puzzle caches
Multi Central
Caches with a view
Also,
Your type of lodging would help.
Camping in campsites
Hotel in a big city
You get the jist.....
-
Just so you know, this is already being done.
-You get a book
-Get a TB tag
-Attach TB to book. The best way is just use a long piece of bead chain so that it can be used as a book mark while the book is being read. You run the bead chain through the page you're reading and around the back spine so it makes one complete circle.
-Put the title of the book in the TB; i.e. BOOK - "The Grapes of Wrath"
-Describe the book in the TB description and tell people to read it and then drop it in another regular sized cache.
-Drop your TB in a cache and you're all set.
For the one I did, I wrote a note on the inside cover of the book, thanking the originator in case he/she ever got it back.
I believe this meets all your criteria, because the TBs will show up on the cache page. Anyways, the method I described above is already being done. Jump on board
. -
This reminds me of the Carrot on a stick idiom. Why do geocachers have to be baited with the offer of extra smilies to re-visit your cache? You contribution to the game would be much greater if you hid a cache in such a nice location that geocachers wrote long logs, and posted many pictures of the area. Share the history of an area, it's great scenery, don't bribe geocachers with the enticement of extra smilies.
While I sympathize with you, this is clearly now a strawman arguement. Those days of geocaching are long gone and for the most part just don't exist anymore. By this, I mean "caches without a quality experience" FAR out number "caches with a quality experience" not matter which measuring stick you use to determine quality.
http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=235528
Geocaching has changed. You're old school now and not of the norm anymore. This is perfectly fine but the arguements of "caching should take you to Mt. Rushmore" hold no validity anymore. People are looking for new ways to enjoy and play the game. Wether it be power trails or coming up with an idea to log multiple smileys on the same GC number, etc. People don't even blink an eye about 150 film canisters placed in a single file line over 30 miles. In fact, they high five it. The game is just different now. And frankly I think it's for the better even though I don't like some of the changes. But trying to encourage cachers to hide quaity hides is really a waste of your precious resources. Times have passed you (and me) by.
And let me be clear, I'm not by any means saying you don't have a right to say what you want but I do think your words go unnoticed the vast majority of the time.
While I understand your concept here I simply can't agree with the premise. To me this is like saying we should no longer aspire to and maintain high moral values since so many others do not. I encourage you to not give in to these feelings. We can make a difference if we continue to try to do so, regardless of the particular activity.
"Those days of geocaching" still exist and are strong. Every one of us who cares about this game should continue to encourage others to play the game well and always try to improve it. Education is a big part of this. Be active in your local community and encourage higher quality hides and behavior. Don't give up and don't give in.
Maybe my words were misunderstood?
Jaded. How can telling the truth be jaded? It's just the way it is. The number of interesting hides FAR out number the interesting hides. It's totally subjective but would you say it's in the neighborhood of 10 to 1. Maybe 50 to 1? How about 100 to 1? Personally, I'd bet it's even higher than that but again it's so subjective.
And if the geocaching community as whole cared, geocaching wouldn't work right? It would just fold under it's own weight. Someone out there must enjoy the caches being placed. My guess, "they", are the vast majority and I believe the membership is still growing.
Again, reread my post. I didn't say "quality" caches don't exist anymore. I just said the game has changed. Educate people on what? To play the game your way. Do you think they don't know that what you and I consider quality caches exist? Well of course they do. They don't need your education, they're well aware of it and have decided to play the game differently. Again, I support them. It doesn't mean I have to join them, but I do support them.
Most importantly, I didn't realize we had higher moral values than others!
Cool! Wait 'til I start telling people I have higher moral values because I like "long hike" hides over LPC's. That should an interesting conversation. 
I don't get the rogue reviewer comment and my location. How does that factor in how I think? You do realize, I prefer "high quality" caches over LPC's. Maybe I didn't make it clear enough. However, I totally respect and "get" the way others play the game. Perhaps you meant something else? I'm not sure.
This morning for me was a perfect example of why I "get" the popularity of P&G or "easy" caches. I had a 45 minute drive between work and an appoitment that was one hour after I left work. I could sit in a lobby for 15 minutes or I could do a cache. I thought about doing the cache on the top of Mt. McKinley but 15 minutes just wouldn't be enough time for me. So I opted for a fence hang on the way to my appointment. Was it earth shattering fun. Nope, but it was fun and on top of it I found a ball field I didn't know existed. The whole experience probably won't be posted in Reader's Digest but it beat waiting in a lobby. I did feel my morals being lowered doing it though
-
No, the rules say you have to sign the log book, they do not say "if your name is in the logbook"
There are very few rules to this game, and that is one of them.
Those people who sign for their husband or wife are not playing by the rules either. And you want to take that and run with it, and stretch it to the next level and beyond.
We have a couple of caches in my area on the east coast, which are called "exchange caches". One is a California exchange, and there is another that is a German exchange. The premise is that a cache in California contains the coordinates for a final in RI, and a cache in RI contains the coordinates for a cache in California. Once you complete the first part of the cache and obtain the coordinates you post a note that you have the info and are awaiting a partner to complete the second phase. Once paired up you make the second find and sign both names. Ground speak has approved the caches so it must be legal.
I have no problem with this. I personally have not completed it since I don't want credit for a find in California that I didn't make, but I have no problem completing the RI portion for someone in CA, nor do I have problems with others who do this. It interesting to read the logs since it seems that everyone has really enjoyed the process and there are lots of invitations for cachers to visit, stay in touch etc.
There ya go, team caching at it's finest yet the one millionth example that geocaching DOES NOT have rules, only guidelines and the one millionth and one example of how people just play the game differently. This posters plays that he/she only puts a smiley on a cache actually visited. Obviously from this example others play differently.
And most importantly, none of this "cheapens" my finds. Enjoy and cache on.
-
Hide a cache on / near your property and camp out at it with a baseball bat. When he shows to collect it, remind him what he is doing is silly. If you do it right it should be the last the cache he vandals.
I'm sure others will have some different solutions, maybe you'll find one that works.
-
This reminds me of the Carrot on a stick idiom. Why do geocachers have to be baited with the offer of extra smilies to re-visit your cache? You contribution to the game would be much greater if you hid a cache in such a nice location that geocachers wrote long logs, and posted many pictures of the area. Share the history of an area, it's great scenery, don't bribe geocachers with the enticement of extra smilies.
While I sympathize with you, this is clearly now a strawman arguement. Those days of geocaching are long gone and for the most part just don't exist anymore. By this, I mean "caches without a quality experience" FAR out number "caches with a quality experience" not matter which measuring stick you use to determine quality.
http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=235528
Geocaching has changed. You're old school now and not of the norm anymore. This is perfectly fine but the arguements of "caching should take you to Mt. Rushmore" hold no validity anymore. People are looking for new ways to enjoy and play the game. Wether it be power trails or coming up with an idea to log multiple smileys on the same GC number, etc. People don't even blink an eye about 150 film canisters placed in a single file line over 30 miles. In fact, they high five it. The game is just different now. And frankly I think it's for the better even though I don't like some of the changes. But trying to encourage cachers to hide quaity hides is really a waste of your precious resources. Times have passed you (and me) by.
And let me be clear, I'm not by any means saying you don't have a right to say what you want but I do think your words go unnoticed the vast majority of the time.
-
My predication. "They're" going to hate it. Like, really hate it!
However, the obvious problem is if you're treating caches as being only found by the same 10 people, but they're not.
What if I come to your town 3 years later and your cache comes up as 1.5/1.5 but has "elevated" it to a 5/1.5.
Of course, there are more problems as well....but you'll hear them all.....
-
Good link. Thanks. I'd love to sit around GS headquarters and discuss this issue and it's fringe issues.
When I first started caching I privately thought to myself that GS would face some major hurdles in the next couple of years do to "bomb" caches. I was obviously wrong. I'm sure they've had hurdles but nothing major; i.e. lawsuits, major guideline changes, entire communites banning it by law, etc.
But this article has to put up some red flags. When papers such as The Washington Post, NY Times, etc. start printing these stories it can't give a warm and fuzzy feeling to GS.
GS has made some interesting decisions as of late to push more money into the system. The most notable being power trails. Clearly not the original intent of geocaching but let's face it the real money is spent by members who enjoy these sort of things and it also promotes community and group caching which in turn brings in new members. Not my sort of thing but cool for the geocaching community nonetheless.
That's the way things go, things evolve. With money involved minor decisions can be made to help the amount of money grow. This happens in pro sports all the time. Tiny rule changes are constantly made to keep scoring high because it's what fans like and of course fans bring the money to the table.
The problem GS may be faced with, is if geocaching really turns the corner (there are hints that it may be; i.e. movies on geocaching, more and more press, etc.) the number of "bomb" caches will go up simply because of the law of numbers. More caches, more false alarms. My prediction is that geocaching will never turn the corner for one simple reason, GPS's. It's this device that keeps them out of the main stream. It can't facebook, twitter, etc. Obviously, the iPhone is challenging that but again it's small potatoes when compared to the number of people who have computers (the key to making facebook explode). Then again, I've been wrong before. We'll see.
However, the obvious solution to almost completely eliminate bomb caches is make ALL containers film canisters. Yes, I know this wouldn't completely eliminate it, but it seems like the vast majority of these scares are from large containers and large unusual containers (i.e. wires, computer boards, etc.).
There has been some grumblings that cache containers are already moving towards a small direction. This however, is completely debatable for many reasons.
But it makes me wonder, will small containers become not only the norm but a fact?
Thanks for the article. I sure do like geocaching and hopefully, I'll get to do some tomorrow.
-
I think Nashville became a forum favorite because it caught on early and the forum has just kind of kept it a favorite by folklore. In the days when 300 caches in a 100 mile circle was a lot, yeah, it had a disproportionate number of urban micros. I can't numerically quantify "lame" but I've cached a lot of other places, too, and it doesn't really seem different. There's some really great stuff in Nashville - take a look at the logs on JoGPS's Geo Mojo series, for example.
Light poles and guard rails are in pretty much every area these days and they're easy enough to avoid.
What Robert said. Nashville is my home town, and I usually return once a year, like the swallows to Capistrano, to see family and friends. I was admittedly horrified the first time I visited as a geocacher and found the area strewn with hundreds of film cans every quarter mile along various roads, many part of the "101 Dalmatians" series (shudder). I really struggled to find interesting caches for a couple years.
But that was 5-6 years ago. Today, those caches are mostly gone, and Nashville is infested with interesting, high-quality caches placed by JoeGPS, Monkeybrad, robertlipe, and other creative cachers. I had a great time caching there this year, in between seeing family and attending GeoWoodstock. The MTGC site also has some good cache recommendations for visitors, several of which I visited.
So, fellow cachers, please remove Nashville from the Geocaching Hall of Shame. It's a great place to visit and cache!
(Removing Tennessee tourism hat. Robert, I'll PM my PayPal address. 
)I thought it was removed years ago! Didn't someone hold a "micro round up" event there years ago where micros were archived and "rounded up"?
I have never been to this city, but I would say Detroit, Michigan. From all the stories you hear about urban collapse, crime and despair, it has no appeal to me.
I remember a European posted a Geocaching.com Google map screen shot of the Detroit area, and asked why there was a "hole" with no caches (basically, it was Detroit proper). Then people posted some other screen shots of Inner cities with cache holes. I thought it was one of the most interesting threads ever.
Heck no, I won't single out any one area. I do know of one Midwestern State that I would consider to have an extremely high incidence of lame hides all over the State. No names, of course.
Caching in Detroit is fine as long as you can read the geocaching.com maps.
http://www.geocaching.com/map/default.aspx...;zm=12&mt=m
The map isn't displaying just right, but if you move it a bit to the NE you get the idea.
That map represents approximately 70 square miles in one of the largest cities in the world (pop. 1,000,000+). There are 16 caches. Whacha ya think? Fun caching in that area?
Pretty amazing isn't it.
-
Wow! Almost 13 pages. A thread hasn't gone this long since ALRs were outlawed. Is this really on the same scale?
Well, of course it is . . .
-It's very clear here that a paying member was called a liar publicly by GS
-They archived a cache without any reasonable explanation; i.e. check it please, I did, we're archiving it anyways.
These are two items that I think concern a lot of people. And this is why the thread is so long.
And you should also know, I don't side with the CO either and my consipiracy theory is as follows (and keep in mind I'm from the state of the cache in question so I have some background conspircay theories and rumors as well that I'm basing all my BS on).
AGAIN this is JUST a THEORY with no PROOF just my THOUGHTS.
1. CO with a reputation of disliking easy finds, p&g, rail caches, etc. and a suspected history of caching disruptively. i.e. taking a 6 foot high tree hide (not their own) and making it a 35' tree hide (once they've logged it), leaving deregatory notes on cache pages, etc. You get the idea. Basically driving the reviewers in the area to drink from numerous problems they need to get invovled in that his name always seem to pop up in. Not necessarily a bad guy, but lots o' pot stirring.
2. Combine this with a caching "UNOFFICIAL club" that really isn't in to hard hides and difficult caches and generally are the types that feel if their "not found list" isn't clear for 20 mile radius, it makes them a loser, less of a person and basically drives them insane and they'll do ANYTHING to keep it clear; i.e. Phone a friend, email lists that provide solutions to puzzles once someone cracks it, etc. You get the idea of the cacher we're talking about, right?
3. CO publishes (but there is actually no container or log) a toughy. No big deal he has a reputation of this. Toughy goes unfound for 2 years. Rumors that it's not there start growing to a fevered pitch. (Hell, you'll get comments on some pages after 3 DNFs suggesting a cache might not be there). Lot's of emails to reviewers whining about the so called cache.
4. This is the part I'm unsure of ---- but perhaps a reviewer has some inside info that it might not be there. I'm not sure about this.
5. Reviewers don't want to just shut it down in fear of retaliation (based on past experiences with the CO). They contact GS, GS ships in a reviewer to do the dirty deed.
6. Nomex royally mucks it up, basically calling the guy a liar on a public forum instead of just simply asking for proof of a container. It's obvious he was shutting it down no matter what happened.
The crowd goes wild, the place errupts and now you have a lot of posts.
7. CO royally mucks up by simply no relisting it (unless he couldn't because he's not telling us). How could he not relist it right? It had already been approved once, why not just relist it? Then, CO announces to the world "his dog ate it" and basically sealing his fate.
So, in summary, here is what get's my goat.
1. I don't believe the reviewers when they claimed they called out for help because they were behind. I don't follow MI caching like a heartbeat but our reviewers are OVER THE TOP GOOD. They're beyond good. Unbelievably fast. If they were behind or struggling with their work load, it's news to quite a few cachers around here, who routinely have their caches posted within hours. I believe it was a planned sabotage or at the very least Nomex might have asked where should I start and they pointed right at one of their main problem childs. Again, I'm not saying the planned sabotage wasn't justified. I'm just saying it was handled poorly. That's all.
2. Plain and simple. GS called someone a liar for no reason that they have provided. I don't like this, not one bit. It's tastless and lacks class.
Just my thoughts. I hope I'm wrong and I probably am. (EDITed for clarification)
That is why I was one of the very first persons to ask to see a detailed pic of the container. Once, the "dog ate it" excuse flew, it pretty much confirmed my gut feeling that GS knew he was up to something and turned out to be right. Now the only thing left is how poorly GS has handled it.
-
I think he should have went with "my dog ate it". "I threw it way" is so obvious and it just killed the thread.
-
My standard MO, although I've only used a few times (5 or 6):
Authority (Police, FBI, CIA, My Wife): The truth - Never had to use this one though
Semi-Authority (Store Owner, Shift Manager, etc.) - Scavenger Hunt
Anyone Else - Lie, lie, lie . . . . The wilder the better.
Standard Lie - Looking for my fiances (I'm married) engagement ring. She threw at me when we got in a fight standing here.
-
1. The eradication of poison ivy.
2. The eradication of sticker vines.
-
Against the guidelines? Well, I'm not so sure. I can't recall any guideline that specifically addresses this issue.
How can they even call it a team? A team is a group of people who work togethere. This is a group of acting individually.
What does "Team Cacheaholic" get from this? I don't get what their motivation in all this is. Unless it's only about the find count? But then... it's so meaningless. He (or she?) can't really take credit for those finds.... not in their own subconscious. The only real accomplishment is convincing a few (dozen?) people to put your names on little peaces of paper.
*Shrug* Oh well, cache on. Please don't log any finds on my caches, Team Cacheaholic.
Oh gosh....now you've done it. You've gone down the VERY slippery internet slope of define "insert a word [you choose TEAM]". Don't even bother getting your dictionary out, someone will quote websters for you soon enough. And whatever you do, don't EVER try to define the word "find".
I totally agree with absolutely everything you said except one small part.
It's still a "team" in a traditional sense. Some teams play entire seasons with some members never once playing in a game. Also, they are working together; i.e. for example the husband finds the cache and the wife likes logging the caches. Hence, a team.
-
Already sent this to Groundspeak earlier in the evening. Too many people surporting the idea that this is against guidelines, it's cheating, and it's borderline spam to boost their numbers.
Against the guidelines? Is this true. I'll freely admit I don't know the guidelines. I just go out and find the occasional cache all alone. I read logs ALL the time saying "Just me on this one, the wife was home sick" signed TEAM ABC. Yes, team caching has never occured on this proposed scale but it's certainly well known that it goes on and sure seems like GS could care less.
-
Read my post in the other forum. I'm assuming the way it works is as follows:
1. YOU (CacherJoe) go find a cache.
2. You sign CacherJoe
3. You sign Team X
4. You go home and log your find under your CacherJoe account
5. You notify the account holder of Team X (I found this one and that and this one, etc.)
6. Team X account holder goes to the cache page(s) and logs it as a find for TEAM X.
And yes, this is just like a Family, Husband and Wife, etc. account (with one minor exception). With those accounts caches are typically logged wether there is one member present, some members of the team present or all the members of the team present.
The difference is that there is usually only one account (an account representing the team). This of course saves money for the team.
Of course there are people out there who maintain 3 accounts; one for the team, one for the husband and one for the wife. Some people who do this will do exactly as I described above. If they were physically at the cache they will sign their own name and the teams name and log it to both accounts (even if the wife was not present). This way they know how many caches they have found individually and they also know how many caches they have found "combined" as a team.
You might ask, why don't they maintain 2 accounts and just add the numbers together? Because the numbers wouldn't be correct.
Cacher A finds cache #1, 2, 5, 7 and 9 for FIVE finds
Cacher B finds cache #1, 2, 4, 7 and 8 for FIVE finds
But really as a team they have only found 7 caches NOT 10.
Personally, I think this is a fantastic idea. It's pretty much well known that the definition of "find" has become almost ANYTHING (that's why you guys love to debate it endlessly) so why not encourage it. It would make fun sport. Just think you could have state teams vs. state teams. Country vs. Country.
-
Well this explains everything!
This means, that behind my back, my wife has been using a GPS and probably most of her life! I wish she would have introduced them to me many years ago instead of keeping it a secret.
Son of a gun.
-
Just flip the log book over and sign the last page, log claiming a FTF and be all exciting about it. If anyone ever questions you, you just play dumb and say "I must have accidently signed the wrong side in my haste." There, problem solved. Sheesh. Rookie. Oh, don't forget to to back date / time it some too, this makes it official and binding in a court of law.
-
Don't you guys get it. The geocacher (BobTheWorld'sGreatestCacher) signs "Team X" to a find. Then Team X gets online and logs the cache as a find without ever visiting the cache. This way if any CO ever checks the log book there is actually a signature for "Team X". This goes on ALL the time with Family accounts, husband and wife accounts, etc. (i.e. husband finds a cache after work w/o wife and then logs it to their team account). But this is taking it to a new and exciting level.
This is awesome!! This is a great way for "Team X" or "Team Z", etc. to rack up a HUGE number of smiley's and FTFs!!! It will drive the numbers hounds absolutely stir crazy, create HUGE threads about ethics, "how to play the game", that's not a true find, on and on, etc. You'll need a calculator to count the number of times the word "cheating and/or cheat" is used. It would make a great drinking game.
Personally, I love it!!
Oh, and just so you understand, I'm one of those guys who could absolutely care less about smileys and how others "play" the game. In fact if it ever came to a vote, I'd be the first to vote on eliminating smiley's or showing the number of finds in any way. But I do realize I'm in a VERY small minority and I'm perfectly fine with the way things are run now. I just feel the whole "find thing" has become a complete and utter farce and every "new angle" to undercut it just dilutes it that much more, which works towards my belief. So all the above is written in jest and sarcasm.
For example, in my area "group caching" is very big. Several people log numerous finds in a day and never leave the comfort of the car. But again, let me be clear. I 100% support those members for playing the game ANY way they see fit (obviously as long as they are respectful, safe, etc.). It is a very enjoyable experience for them to be out with others and having fun. I applaud that and encourage that. However, when you stick your number of finds in BIG BOLD characters on your profile, I have to raise an eyebrow. But again, that's all I do, raise an eyebrow. I still treat the person just like I treat any other person.
I simply love this idea! It's amazing it took someone so long to think of it. Where do I sign up for Team X? Just think if multiple "Teams" start forming all across the country. We could have Team X (450 members) vs. Team Z (495 members strong) racing for the most number of finds.
Just kidding, I only sign my name to the logs (sometimes my son, but he can't read or write and doesn't have an account).
But you gotta admit, if this takes off, these forums will be a blast to read!! I sure hope it does...pure genius!
-
I'm assumming this is a violation of the TOA. I'm not reading it and you can't make me
.You have 6 caches published but state that you haven't and won't read the TOA... yet to get each cache published you had to check a box stating that you had read, understand and will abide by it. So are you saying that 6 times you have lied to your Reviewer to get a cache published?
Five of those are adopted. The one I placed on my own, I skimmed the parts pertaining to hiding pretty throughly as well as doing quite a bit of reading. So far it's still doing great and going strong. Keep your fingers crossed.
So technically on that one I lied. But don't tell them
-
TDE / Superfly -
Thanks for answering my question. I appreciate it.
Bittsen / Wrastro
Yes, I was referring to post #351 sorry for the confusion.
However, I do COMPLETELY agree with CR. Maybe some are taking my comments in the wrong way. GS (or a rep for them) publicly accused a paying member of being a liar (it's still there right on the cache page for all to see). To me this is low and tasteless. EVEN if you have undisputable proof that a person is lieing, you simply just archive the cache and move on, saying nothing. You don't put out in the public that he is a liar. Also, I would expect them to cancel the membership and refund a prorated amount as well, if the member was lieing to GS and they knew it for a fact. I'm assumming this is a violation of the TOA. I'm not reading it and you can't make me
.I just wanted a picture so I can form a solid opinion of GS. Thanks to "no pic" the only ill feelings I have is poor judgement by a reviewer. And again, that's only my opinion, certainly not a fact. And you don't "have" to post a pic. You could email it to me. Not that you care, but you'd have a new ally in MI and with your permission I would tell anyone and everyone that he sent me the proof and I'm satisfied.
Finally, I don't see how GS could deny your cache if you just re-submitted, especially with a picture of the container and you are standing next to it with the container flipped over. Again, you could find this out tomorrow if you don't believe me.....Tiki and/or Rusty would have an answer for you by the end of the day. They are amazingly quick reviewers.
-
Bittsen understands.
One good detailed picture(s) and it'd all be over. I'm willing to bet some people would cancel their membership over it.
I always try to put myself in "others" people shoes.
If GS wronged me, I'd be singing to high heaven, posting pictures, emailing other cachers, re-appealing, posting on GS forums, posting on other geosites, blogging about it, etc. If GS did that to you wouldn't you want people to know the REAL truth so they can form their own opinons of the company?
However, the picture(s) must be posted soon. Time will tell . . . but if no nice detailed pictures show up . . .
Also, I haven't read every single post but I've read a bunch of them. What I don't understand, is the day it was archived why didn't the original hider just resubmit it with a different name, slightly different description and the same coordinates? Seemed like it would save a bunch of drama. Or better yet, just resubmit the whole thing exactly as you had it before but include a picture of the container and email to Tiki and Rusty (reviewers). What are they gonna do, deny it?
-
Well....not all the questions, just to be clear.
True. However, he's answered a heck of a lot more questions than I would, if Groundspeak called me a liar in a public format.
As much as I love this game, an insult like that would've likely lead to a geocide by me.
There are some things in this life I refuse to tolerate.
Being called a liar, when I behave honorably is one of those things.
And, he's answered a heck of a lot more questions than Groundspeak, Nomex, Jenn or the local reviewers.
In fact, of all the people involved, Super Fly is the only one who has been forthright.
Gotta say I agree with that ^^
Me too....however, I'd still like to know if he plans to post a picture of the cache container in the VERY near future (less than 24 hours). Once he does or doesn't then I'll reform the current conspiracy theory I have in my head.
-
I am not defending anything just answereing questions.
Well....not all the questions, just to be clear.
.
Cool! Wait 'til I start telling people I have higher moral values because I like "long hike" hides over LPC's. That should an interesting conversation. 
(Removing Tennessee tourism hat. Robert, I'll PM my PayPal address. 
)
Geo Caching meets Book Crossing
in General geocaching topics
Posted
In my limited experience no a book won't wick water. The one I read, had been passed several times. Besides the writing on the inside of the cover it was in perfect condition.
I found it in a sealed 1 gallon (I believe this was the size) freezer zip loc bag. Before I sent it on it's way, I replaced the bag with a brand new one. It didn't need it but it couldn't hurt.
With some luck and proper handling from geocachers it should be fine.