Vater_Araignee

There is an instance for me, where people know where a cache I place is but for some reason didn't sign or use an Alternate Logging Requirement I supplied. It's not that it is fun to do it, honestly I don't like it but hey, if most everyone else is going to do one or both then at lest do the same. I cant even begin to count how many caches I saw wile driving past, but I have the courtesy to the other finders who bothered to stop and sign to not claim the find. It is the same boat as drive by hiding, throw downs and and logging a NA because you DNFed. But I still think what other people do with another CO's cache is that CO's issue not mine.

The heat hasn't slowed me down, but it has made me even less likely to log a cache online.

Like the horrid interpretation of the first. It means government cant play favorites with a religion, not a religions cant get involved with government. My only agenda in this post was to point out a political agenda not to promote religious one.

Clearing my map isn't important to me. As I am a firm believer that a multi-cache should be multi-cache not solve a vert, find final, unfortunately some multi-caches end up ignored (= flagged in GSAK) because it is a field puzzle cache. Kiss at least 30% goodbye. I don't particularly like field puzzles that means some puzzles end up automatically ignored. I also end up ignoring puzzles that require one to become a near expert especially in a field I find boring. (to use hyperbole)I don't want to solve a cypher that was ROT13nd, converted to hexadecimal, base 64, decimal, and then Unicode in decimal minus the pounds, ampersands and semicolons, without a key. With a key is only slightly more tolerable. A.K.A. NOT FUN for me. Kiss about 75% goodbye. As of last night there are 2225 puzzles in Michigan. That leaves about 256 I'll consider (not considering challenge) 14 are large. 498 are regular. 754 are small. (I'll automatically assume 50% are actually micro) 691 are micro. 267 are other/not chosen. I'd be willing to bet that less than 10% are bigger than micro. It is safe to assume I won't bother with another 60%. Now we are down to 102 or 1.2 caches per county. I might have 10 in range. Even though the math says I should just completely ignore all puzzles I don't bother filtering till GSAK and I don't delete. I no matter how doubtful, I might try out a particular puzzle one day.

Going that rout you just have to make the final coords the start coords.

Well said! But unfortunately there will always be guys who cheat in everything they do How are they cheating? It is between the seeker and the CO, if the CO does not delete their log then they are not cheating. Now if the CO has not logged in for a long time and there are NM requests on the cache then you might have a case to have the cache archived.

I like to have a surplus in the event I were to find a bunch of worthy caches in a short period of time. For example, if I didn't have some in reserve I wouldn't have had any left to give to the 4 caches I favorited on a recent road trip. I don't like the idea of removing an old favorite in order to add a new one. I don't like the idea of removing a point either but... If a cache has been archived, I have no problem with leaving a not that states what the total was before I removed the point because the only good it is doing anyone on an archived cache is ego.

GSAK Set a filter for the CO. Add points. You might even request a macro that totals points in filter.

Use a hard charcoal pencil to draw some mildew on the log sheet. Make sure the log sheet stays wet. Crack the container. Add some black dollar store slime to the container. Occasionally spray the outside of the container with fast tack so that it is sticky. Keep lacing the hiding spot with sugar to attract ants.

Who are they cheating? They can only be cheat 2 people/groups and unless you are the CO or in the CO group then they certainly are not cheating you. That is unless they agreed to be in competition with you. Simply signing up and logging caches is not an agreement to compete with another seeker. Using the "I'm competitive" logic you should find my logging habits despicable because you cant tell if you found more than me or not. I no longer log caches I hated and for the rest of them "If I log them then I log them." I probably haven't logged around 60% of my finds. Now if you can find my logging practices (or lack there of) exceptable, then ya really shouldn't take issue with anyone's until specific conditions are met. 1. It is your cache and they didn't sign the log or adhere to an alternative logging method. (Remember, if you have an ALR you must still except a signed log even if they don't meet the ALR.) 2 They agreed to be in competition with you.

If you truly find out that you want to avoid them and want an easy way to avoid them then the next step you will want to take are: 1. Become a premium member. 2. Learn to use pocket queries. 3. Filter out micros. 4. Should you find that one or more of the following sizes are returning more than you want to deal with then filter them out also. Not chosen Other Small Not chosen and other around me are micro about 90% of the time and small is micro about 15%. YMMV.

It lacks taste. Now the concept has me thinking. Make a LPC and post in the description "Always keep in mind that favor points exists to eventually dole out tho this cache obviously does not deserve one."

One time I worked really hard to find an Obama cache and when I did I was penalized/taxed 30 smileys and those smileys were distributed among the arm chair cachers of the U.S. Think about how the PMs feel.

radii | 02-15-2009 | 04-25-2010 | 05-23-211 | 06-30-12 | miles | PMOC | ATAU | PMOC | ATAU | PMOC | ATAU | PMOC | ATAU | --------------------------------------------------------------- 001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |1(own)| 0 |1(own)| --------------------------------------------------------------- 005 | 0 | 43 | 0 | 53 | 0 | 65 | 1 | 66 | --------------------------------------------------------------- 010 | 2 | 106 | 0 | 145 | 4 | 235 | 6 | 276 | --------------------------------------------------------------- 019 | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 41 | MAX | --------------------------------------------------------------- 020 | 5 | 451 | 2 | 500 | 22 | 931 | 49 | | --------------------------------------------------------------- 021 | 10 | 500 | 2 | | 28 | MAX | 56 | --------------------------------------------------------------- 025 | 16 | | 20 | | 49 | | 90 | | --------------------------------------------------------------- 050 | 84 | | 196 | | 401 | | 481 | | --------------------------------------------------------------- 100 | 179 | | 341 | | 723 | | 937 | | --------------------------------------------------------------- 105 | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |NA | MAX | | --------------------------------------------------------------- 145 | NA | NA | NA | NA | MAX | | ------------------------------------------------- 146 | NA | NA | 500 | | ----------------------------------- 184 | 500 | | --------------------- For those who don't know. PMOC= Premium Member Only Cache ATAU= Available To All Users Selected types:Traditional Cache, Multi-cache, Letterbox Hybrid, Unknown Cache, and Is Active My search radius does not stop at boarders so it extends into Ohio, Indiana and Canada. For those who are interested, if I set the Michigan border then I receive max PMOC at 121 miles.

Ah, a "There is only 1 geocaching site" statement.

That works too. I have never taken issue with an inquisitive cacher e-mailing me. Some times my responses are so short as to appear curt but I do reaspond and I would rather see 10 DNF's in a row on the page and then someone gets excited because they took a chance and found it vs. having to post it is ok every two or three DNF's and people deciding they need to form a mob to find it. And to be honest when I am having difficulty with a cache to the point that I resort to reading the 5 logs I would rather see 5 descriptive DNF's that might clue me in. Yes dnf's have helped me find caches. But getting... 1. Enable Listing (nothing was ever wrong) 2. Temporarily Disable Listing 3. Needs Archived 4. Didn't find it (I'm going to request a NA) 5. Didn't find it ... is 60 to 80% guaranteed useless information.

Distance I had to travel or if you where willing to pay shipping depends on if you would get the cache back or not. Well my mood would determine it too. If I was in a good mood when I found out I was lied to, no harm no foul, but if I am already stressed when I find out... You might just get a video of me using the cache you caused me to abscond with as target practice to relieve that stress. The use of three muscles relieves stress by 23.

I would give ya favorite points for that if I could. I go through bouts where I don't log in for months, It doesn't mean I haven't found out something is wrong with a cache or that I wont get to it. (It also doesn't mean I'm not actively finding caches either.) I had to write a message to a reviewer because a cache that was not missing was going to get archived for being missing. It isn't required that you post updates, but it's very much appreciated by both finders and reviewers. Otherwise no one has any idea what's going on with your cache. There are a lot of inactive and negligent owners out there, so it doesn't take much for you to get lumped in with them. The incident you mentioned with the reviewer is proof of this. After all those DNFs, a simple note stating that you checked on it and it was still there would have sufficed. And then if someone has simply used a NM log I would have simply removed the attribute showing that I was on top of it with having to post a log. The only thing that actually happened was a Self Entitled To Find Every Cache Cacher, made me have to contact a reviewer because the SETFECC was to lazy to actually look for the cache. 4 DNF's is nowhere near an indication that a cache is missing, and obviously Tom n Chris never heard of a decoy.

I would give ya favorite points for that if I could. I go through bouts where I don't log in for months, It doesn't mean I haven't found out something is wrong with a cache or that I wont get to it. (It also doesn't mean I'm not actively finding caches either.) I had to write a message to a reviewer because a cache that was not missing was going to get archived for being missing.

That is clearly plural. You attempt to quote that out of context was doomed from the start. I did correctly quote it from: Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines II. LISTING Guidelines: Listing guidelines cover the requirements that you, as a geocache owner, need to adhere to in order for your geocache to be successfully published on Geocaching.com 1. Listing Guidelines for All Geocaches item 3. Geocache Contents Wow, you want to put such a narrow context on it and from that you derive this rule of singularity. There is absolutely nothing in the guidelines that states that there can't be more than one container/log. GS has defined the word multi- and even gave it its own icon. Nothing in the guidelines stats that there can't be a log on each step of the already defined multi, and the definition already includes multiple containers. Again, you're trying to read something in that just simply isn't there. And there is nothing in the guidelines that say I have to log every single one of the multi stages with a log in it. So the first one I come to, I can claim as the find. You cant change that no matter how much you protest. Then there is the simple fact that an Additional Logging Requirement is an additional logging requirement, there are rules governing them. Arguments about past and future action do not apply, 1+1+2=4, so does 1+2+1=4 and 2+1+1=4. Sign the log claim the find.

I'm not against them, but I am against a cache that requires I use: A boat made by Smoker Craft. A cache requiring Mammut climbing gear. A cache requiring a Maglite. Or any cache requiring a specific brand of equipment.

That is clearly plural. You attempt to quote that out of context was doomed from the start. I did correctly quote it from: Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines II. LISTING Guidelines: Listing guidelines cover the requirements that you, as a geocache owner, need to adhere to in order for your geocache to be successfully published on Geocaching.com 1. Listing Guidelines for All Geocaches item 3. Geocache Contents

You are reading something into it thats simply not there. I am reading nothing into it. A geocache is a container and log originally placed by the CO. It does not get any simpler than that. Sounds like you are reading more into it.

No we can't. One time I posted an online log where I was excited to get bloody buddy. Spiders Any wasp I can catch without getting stung. My pitcher plants love them. Araignee I just love the emerald ash borer. Just love smashing them that is. Spiders Ants Araignee