fbingha

I don't see an active nor archived cache around those coordinates. There's also too much writing on those pages for 2014. Maybe you found a summit register.

I see the post as Groundspeak simply looking to cause a bump in new hides, nothing more, nothing less. Whether or not one archives their mountaintop cache, that's not going to have any material effect on their coffers. The urban hides must surely be what drives the majority of new registrations. They know they already have the sort like us, we continue to pay each year, but we've been at this a long time now and our numbers dwindle. It could be said that our numbers dwindle as a direct result of the type of caching that Groundspeak continues to promote. It's a catch-22, keep the hiker happy vs bringing in more and more and more urban families. The people are in the cities, that's where the money is. Geocaching Groundspeak style is a very odd business model. It relies entirely on volunteers to set the product that it sells the tools to locate and track. Perhaps the continuing decline reaches the point where Groundspeak has to incentivize hiders to place caches. Recognition beyond just favorite points: rewards, special privileges, shiny geocoins, tags, etc. Why should paid Lackeys get all the tags and names on a coin when it is the Reviewers and the Hiders that make the company product? Groundspeak needs to get really creative in ways to encourage hiders to be better and be reliable. I will continue to hide caches in my area because the only way I can foster the game is to hide worthwhile caches. I will not archive any caches because Groundspeak suggests that I do. I make the decision based on muggle history / cost to replace / effort to check up on / balance of having too many active caches.

Why all this ruckus? For Groundspeak, the need for profit is paramount to maintain the operation. They need more users to purchase premium membership which they feel is increased by new hides and caches that attract favorites. It's entirely possible that Groundspeak continues to move in this direction by encouraging cache turnover in a more proactive manner. I'm certain they have lot of discussion about how encourage new hides that result in more premium membership sales. It's not the lonely cache hikers, of which I participate in as well, that make Groundspeak their money.

What game would this be then? Opencaching has maybe 2000 caches listed in the US. Where I live in So Cal, there isn't a single cache listed for hundreds of miles. Within Los Angeles, there are less than 10 and when you look at those, well, no one is logging them. It barely survives, perhaps in other parts of the country/world it still matters.

Right, that's so inconceivable as to not even be considered. Sure, there are rumors of that, like Bigfoot, but then reality intervenes.

1. It's a letterbox. Does it have a stamp? Put it back. 2. It's an archived cache. 3. It's a cache that hasn't been published yet. 4. It's a mystery/Wherigo/multi stage, which you won't find listed where you found it. Send the coordinates to a reviewer, where you found it and if it has a log book, post names and dates from within. They can tell you what you've found, if it's a geocache.

Not sure what you are referring to by "real" letterboxes, but I'm referring to those listed on Atlas Quest that have nothing to do with geocaching. Letterboxing is about the trading of stamp imprints where store bought stamps are not desirable. Of course, it's probably location specific to some degree but I'm talking about the Atlas Quest letterboxing community.

I agree with you. In really think they take the view that the the forums are just the place to avoid and ignore.

Correct, I've never used Coordinates for a real letterbox on Atlas Quest.

If the contents are changed to JPG but the filename is left as .png and .gif, then that's why the Content-Type is what it is, it matches the suffix. I think it's just bad code, no an grand conspiracy.

Landmarks and clues are not a requirement to list a box on Atlas Quest. A "real" Letterbox can be hidden in such a way that you don't need to follow a trail of landmarks or clues. It is acceptable to tell the user where to go, via an address or "The Post Office on Main St", then where the box is hidden is made clear "behind the big flower pot". I use clues in some of mine and some I list at the actual coordinates. The only requirement on Geocaching.com and Atlas Quest is that the box contains a stamp. I would say the vast majority of Letterboxers would consider the including of a hand carved stamp to be more important that how you found your way to the box. That's why I hide Letterboxes and I cross list most of them on Atlas Quest. Second point, people are making the topic confusing by bringing up caches that contain stamps to show progress or prove something was found. A cache can contain a stamp and not be listed as a letterbox. Letterboxes were only ever included in Geocaching as a way to encourage that community to cross list their boxes, way back in the early days. At this point, the most sensible thing would be to add a "Has a Stamp" attribute, and even better would be a "Has a Hand Carved Stamp" attribute. I like the LBH icon but if challenges can't get their own icon, and many more people enjoy those, then what sense is there for LBH to have an icon, other than nostalgia and the fact that it might break some existing platform that expects the icon.

A note saying "Take me to Germany". That's the only chance that your Travel Bug stays moving more than a few months.

I've been dealing with the processing of uploaded images for 20 years. Forcing all uploaded images through a JPEG conversion is either: Programmer laziness Lack of understanding of how to process GIF and PNG Lack of library ability (highly unlikely in 2020) Product said make those files as small as possible. I would suggest either #1 or #4 It shouldn't be done because it breaks animated Gif and eats background transparency, besides the obvious loss of clarity.

I've hidden quite a few Letterbox Hybrids with stamps that I've carved. It's always been clear that a Letterbox Hybrid can be hidden as a traditional, as a Multi, and as a Mystery. That's always been acceptable. I've hidden one Bonus cache that was published as a Letterbox Hybrid, because the LBH can be used as a mystery cache. Now we are to believe that the LBH can be any sort of mystery cache unless it is the mystery type that relies on finding other caches first? If this rule existed before the creation of this attribute then my reviewers should have done a better job in rejecting my illegal LBH bonus cache. When did this rule come to be? We know the guidelines are always changing. I have a set of LBHs already waiting to be published along with an LBH bonus cache. Given the effort that I put in to these hides, much more than almost anyone in my area puts in to geocaching, this is a huge turnoff for me to try. You can not say with any sort of logic say that an LBH can be hidden as a mystery cache unless it is a mystery "bonus cache". Anyway you skin it, it's still a mystery, which LBHs are allowed to be hidden as. Letterbox Hybrid Bonus Cache: https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC7FC7G_panorama-vista-preserve Published 11/26/2017 Description made it quite clear that you have to find other caches first, which are also LBHs. This article: https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=127&pgid=927 Should read as follows: "A bonus cache is a Mystery Cache or Letterbox Hybrid for which you have to find clues in other caches. Sometimes the coordinates for the bonus cache are in one other cache. In other cases, you gather clues for the final coordinates of the bonus cache from multiple other caches. Clues for a bonus cache can be hidden in any other cache type." Fixed. Real simple. What's the argument here? Other than "Because we said so".

Intriguing. I live in a city of 300,000+, most of my premium member only, easily accessible, not micro, traditionals haven't been found THIS YEAR.

Why don't you put a standard information page up stating the site is down for maintenance?

Yes, on Dec 6th.

I received a trackable for this promotion today.

The only change I think should be made is a notice to the cacher when the final is more than 2 miles away.

The scotch duct tape that I've used is always really thin and just doesn't stick very well.

Come on Groundspeak, with the decline in Geocaching interest, don't you think this isn't the best time to go draconian? If you've allowed Reviewers the leeway of granting a waiver for the 2 mile rule, in the past, then you should continue to allow those existing caches to be modified while keeping their existing waypoints.

You need to style the box in a more professional manner. There needs to be a distinction between the "The cache is temporarily unavailable" and the log message. All being the same font style, size, and weight is not doing this.

The Duck brand camo tape sold at Home Depot is what you want. Don't touch the Scotch brand duct tape, it just plain sucks. I also use the gorilla glue black duct tape but I can't say it is that much better than the Duck brand for using on caches. I hide a lot of lock & locks with duct tape on them so I have some skin in this game. I always cover the hinges with duct tape because So Cal sun kills those hinges in 1 year. Duct tape over the hinge, it lasts forever. If you are wanting the tape for actual camo, then I would just paint. If exposed to sun, use duct tape. If not exposed to sun, use duct tape or paint with matte paint. I buy rustoleum camo paints at various colors at Wal-Mart. When I use duct tape for a cache that isn't exposed and doesn't really need camo, I still sometimes put the gorilla glue black tape on it just to make it stay dark in case nosy muggles happen to be digging around.

Okay, granted but what if "reach" and "return" might require the usage of one of those grabber things for a person in a wheelchair? A TOTT, but only for those who can't reach a book 6 ft up on a shelf? Would the wheelchair attribute/ T1 be allowed if one notes that such a TOTT might be required for those in a wheelchair?

Agreed that this is a bad design. I should be able to change my unpublished cache type without having it wipe out waypoints. Change your design to execute a validation routine upon save that highlights waypoints that are invalid for the chosen type.