Subterranean

I don't think they're gonna tell you. I'm intrigued, too. It must be a real cache, otherwise people wouldn't be claiming legitimate finds on it... right? Also, if the trick were simply some weird logging requirement, the difficulty and terrain rating wouldn't be accurate. So many questions, so few answers...

Ah... if only life was that simple. Exactly. I found 56 caches that day- so I logged 56 finds. Not a real complicated concept, eh? I took this to mean "one cache, one find" (...as in, never suffering a DNF). Indeed, if only life was that simple!

Also, consider that much of these 24-hour marathons take place in the dark and that the cachers would still be mindful of muggles (let's hope). These records are truly unbelievable, but that's what makes them impressive. It seems more unbelievable to think that these cachers are lying or cheating. It is no skin off my nose (as my mom would say) to take them at their word.

Just curious, is there a record for Lindburgh-style (i.e. solo) marathon caching?

Why do I keep reading "Georadio" as "Gerardo?"

That’s it, evenfall! Bike racks! After school! Be there or else everyone will know you’re chicken! Seriously, I read your entire post. There are many things you wrote that I could appreciate and agree with, but you also wrote many things that simply aren’t true and, in some cases, display utter irony. Who cares? The bottom-line, whether you agree with this or not, is that I said one thing and you heard another. Period. It happens, no big deal. Enjoy.

Huh??

I certainly never said nor meant to imply that!! I surely don't see anything wrong with benchmark hunting as a hobby, I just don’t see what it has to do with caching.

Well, here's my take on it. I find it strange benchmarks are even given a category on the stats page. Geocaching is about cachers hiding things for other cachers to find with a GPS. Benchmarks, of course, are missing this hidden to be found by others aspect. There are many other things (high points, degree confluence points, etc.) that can be found with a GPS, but have nothing to do with caching. Benchmarking, in my opinion, is similar to these. I don't think it should even be given a stats category and certainly shouldn’t count in the geocache find total.

Granted, you need to check the start date for the user to be sure they recently signed up. I guess to get an accurate number you could sign up a sock puppet account and use that number. ...I'm not even sure the number at the end of the web address gives an accurate idea of total users. There are many assumptions involved (all accounts are given a number, the first number used was one, the next number used is always one more than the last, etc.) that may not be true.

I'm thinking there are about 392,000 registered accounts. How'd I get this number? If you go to the bottom of the main forums page, you can see who is the most recently registered member (this is for the forums, but it's most likely a fairly new GC member, too.) If you go to their profile page, you'll see a user I.D. number at the end of the web address. I think that this number gives an accurate indication of how many accounts there are... I certainly could be way off on this one, though.

Hope you have a great time with it!

Benchmarks aren't hidden by other users like caches (...even virtuals, in a way...) are. I personally find it strange that benchmarks are included on the stats page at all. There are plenty of things that can be found using a GPS (high points, confluence points, etc.) that have nothing to do with geocaching... just like benchmarks. Why is a tally of found benchmarks included on a site for geocaching? But, congratulations on your 133 finds! Why not celebrate in increments of 133 now? (Really, how is the 100th any more significant?) Your next milestone will be 266, I guess!!

It's true (maybe). The approver account "WGA" was once occupied by Alan, but since March/April of 2003, the man behind the curtain has been Brian. (Check how the forum posts have been signed.) (Also note, though, that the first post was "edited by wicacher." Perhaps the name was switched from "wicacher" to "WGA" at the same time the switch from Alan to Brian was made... maybe, maybe not, but it's the same account nonetheless. Things that make you go Hmmmm...)

Well, I'm not Curmudgenly Gal, but to answer your question, I think the easiest way to do it is to place html code in one of the text boxes that are used to describe yourself. Ya know... such as "Hobbies,"..... ...Hmmm that's the only one I can think of, but there are like three or four of them that can be used.

I'm burnt out, too. Either that, or I'm just kinda "over it." Geocaching has really lost most of its appeal for me... for reasons unknown. It's sad because at the beginning, I was so enthusiastic about it.

I'd say this is too much html.

There are tons of great ideas here and in the other thread (I haven't even read all of the other thread), but I LOVE this title. I don't think it's too much of a Twain rip-off (He said "Golf is a good walk spoiled," for those who may be wondering). While I'm thinking about copyright issues, keep in mind that the word "Geocaching" is Jeremy's registered trademark.

Come on, it's not that impressive. Seriously, I think it's great when someone sets a personal goal and accomplishes it.

Here's another mention of it in a log from October 30, 2004. (Searched "'finders tree' site:geocaching.com"...without the apostrophe) Hmmm... I'm from Wisconsin and I have no clue what they're talking about. I know that those October 30th logs are from members of a group that often caches together called "Team Badger." I can assure you, however, that some of Wisconsin's best have cached with Team Badger and I HIGHLY doubt that they would practice logging methods that others would find unethical, or whatever. It must just be some kind of inside joke, or something.

Hmmm... I like it, but it seems a bit too long.

I wish the same smilies that are available here in the forums were available to use in the logs. The ones that are available to use in the logs look so low-res.

No, I think he meant it's really too bad that it's only a joke. As in... he wishes it were real. (Of course, there was the added in for good measure.)

Mmmmm... animals... ...drool... C'mon, people... I put some work into this one. No takers?

After reading trough this thread, Perhaps I have learned one important thing. Really, you guys are disgusting!! I have always thought of geocachers as being nice, normal people, Loving to animals. From what I have read here, Only evil people are geocachers. Outsiders like me don’t feel that this treatment of animals is acceptable. Love animals! See the error in your ways!!