mongoose39uk

Well done

The simple answer I guess is that the duck "chose" to give no warning, an option which is always available. Lonely job, someone has to do it, a decision had to be made, someone made it live with it and move on.

I for one am quite glad it was closed as my post about what was going on in that thread would not have been very moderate. I am pretty sure the duck will let you open a new thread to discuss extreme caches in more general and less personal terms.

I thought your point was this was before he was aware of Letterboxing before what has now become geocaching?

Cool

Time to put this one on ignore I think. It's going around in circles. Strikes me as yo have an answer such as it is like it or not

sounds like there has been ample opportunity for the owner to get it unarchived. If its a good spot go place your new one.

Of course there is a pub, though as the venue is open to all there would be no need for one.

As others have said, Cache'n'Flash events could be regarded as micros, and this event from 2004 needed 9 physical caches to be found inorder to get the time and date for it. If I can find a decent maze (with no entrance fee!) though... A maze thats free to get in................ Get it submitted then Paul Ghost of the White Lady

Wrong the system did not work, the email on the account was not accessible so no notification was received. I saw this thread and put two and two together knowing the area the OP caches in and knowing that Pengy&Tigger know why my maint has fallen behind. Also, Mr. White is quite correct if you log in via WAP it does not update the fact you have logged in. However, in the vast majority of cases the normal procedure would work. Can I request that now the OP's question has been answered this thread gets closed.

Plenty of places around there for another cache. Boggarts behind you will be a whole new box etc. Though I can't say I will be enjoying the muddy approach to replace it.

Plenty of places around there for another cache. Boggarts behind you will be a whole new box etc. Though I can't say I will be enjoying the muddy approach to replace it.

Yeah, me her dad, who has now changed the email for notifications to his own as Rachel is not always getting her email.

Pikey van, thanks for bringing this to my attention via the forums, unfortunately my daughters internet access has been very limited of late . I will sort it out for her in the next couple of days along with some long needed maint on my own caches. It would help to be honest if more people used the needs maint logs.............. I went out to sort my own out a couple of weeks ago then got back to find caches very close to the ones with maint needed logs on them also needed sorting out. Ta Tony

I think a cooling of period is an excellent compromise. Just hope Web Rat gets an apology from those concerned, then hopefully things can move on.

Not done much caching on Dartmoor, though from what I remember when looking for caches you tend to fall over multiple letterboxes within feet of them on the Tors. Pretty much hidden in the same way. No big deal both can live quite happily together

Maybe these?

Congratulations Jeff, now where did I leave my glasses

Are there? Wow. One example Stoney Stashers Placed a good variety of hides as well.

Off topic from the OP I guess, though I will risk it anyway. My first cache find on the 30th of December 2003 was a 35mm film can under a style 4 ft from the car. Robrovski's Cache Micros are far from new, a fair amount of the ones in this area were micros. Some are good, some are bad others are just OK. It's not the size of the cache that counts, it is the thought that goes into the placement. I am sure we all get it wrong every now and again. Then, sometimes even what was a brilliant place for a cache can turn bad after a few months. I went back to one of mine that was in a OK area (not fantastic just OK) and discovered large amounts of fly tipping.

Mongers has updated the page, Dr Solly sent me a list of records, fastest 1000,2000,3000,4000 and 5000, also 0 to 2000, 0 to 3000, 0 to 4000, 0 to 5000, just need to check a few dates with them on the last batch. Amazing stuff! Congratulations (I am sure they do it to keep me busy)

Good idea, well put

I think more precisely a Geocaching forum not a forum for geocachers....... a slight but important difference, while I may not agree with all Mrs Blorenges decisions, I know she is working hard to stick to the guidelines. Perhaps its time to take a step back and allow the reviewers and moderators time to settle in and stop challenging every decision they make.

Double Post

The GAGB Guidelines are here Guidelines I bring your attention to point 4 When placing a cache, the onus is on the placer to seek the permission of the landowner. . Before we start changing well established guidelines is it possible to seek the opinions of the geocaching community? Edited to say.. There is a poll function on the GAGB forum Here , perhaps this would be a good use of it. The GAGB is after all there to represent Geocachers, seems a shame to have this function and not use it. isn't the onus STILL on the cache placer - simply that there is MORE onus now?! This seems to be very similar to National Trust caches - in as much as direct proof is now needed, rather than the assumption that all caches are placed with permission. Doesn't bother me - I don't own any sidetracked caches! I'm more interested in some of the other archived London caches... hint hint...! Indeed, and though proof of permission for SSSI, National Trust etc. has been required by the reviewers for a considerable time, we have not changed the guidelines for those. While I fully support the need to have this confirmed permission, I see no need myself for the GAGB to change its guidelines at this time. I invite the use of the poll facility to seek a consensus on this. I am however posting on my own behalf, as a committee we have not had the opportunity to discuss this.