bennet

GC163N9

It all has to do with common sense and intent. If you attempt one of my hides... If the issue why you cannot ink the paper has nothing to do with the challenge of the cache, and is only because you forgot a pen, then find some way to make a mark on the logbook and then enter an online find log. I'm fine with that. However, if the reason you didn't ink the paper is because you were unable or unwilling to retrieve the cache (for example, because it was out of your reach and you didn't want to climb or employ a tool or other method), then although you eyeballed the cache, you didn't complete (find) the cache, and if you do enter a find log anyway and I know that you didn't complete the cache, then I'm deleting your log. Again, intent. I intended for you to climb the tree. I did not intend for you to forget your pen. If I attempt one of your hides... I won't enter an online find log unless my ink is on the paper of the logbook in that cache. If your logsheet is a big spitball - either I have to get an inked log on that mess of paper or I find an alternate piece of paper to serve as a temp log that I can write on and leave that with the cache. Let's say I found an open ammo box at your coordinates, with obvious geocaching trade items dumped on the ground next to the container, but I cannot find the logbook. In that case, I may fashion a new logbook, sign it, gather and reassemble the cache, and rehide the cache in a reasonable manner. The cache is obviously broken, and I fix it and enter a find log since my ink is on the logbook. Let's say I found shreds of plastic tupperware, pieces covered with camo-duct tape, scattered by a lawnmower at your coordinates. I also see small toys shredded and scattered. No logbook, and anything that was in or part of the cache is shredded and destroyed. In this case, I will not try to repair your cache because it is irreparable. I won't try to replace your cache because I don't know you and you may not appreciate it or I could possibly be mistaken in some way. In this case, although most people would conclude that I found the remnants of your cache and I probably did, it was not a viable cache when I was there and my log is not on a logbook in the cache, and so I enter a DNF.

So I really didn't say "dadgum" in the above post. I said something like "dam" which is equally as tame. Isn't it? The ole censor got it and changed it. Wow! Wow again. You have to be kidding me. I can't believe that that is seriously the case. What a place... I chose not to edit it and take it out. Golly gee, I guess.

I have not read this entire thread, so my statements here may be redundant to what someone else has already typed... I just read the first post. Bravo to the GSA and geoaware for getting rid of those dadgum gaging stations. I, myself, hold earthcaches in high regard. Through them, I have developed a strong interest in geology, and they have taught me a lot. I personally like to go into an earthcache, as a finder, with the feeling that I am going to see something cool, and I'm going to learn something, and spend some time. When I create one, I strive for those same things. I do them for the experience and the memory, not for the number, and frankly, the gaging stations don't impress a very strong memory in me. Yes, they measure water level. That is a geological factor, but it really isn't a significant lesson or experience, at least at the level that I expect a published earthcache to be. My opinion is that gaging stations reduce the standard associated with earthcaches, and that they need to go. I am glad they are gone. And lets face it. The flood of gaging station submissions is the result of a numbers game, or a "get the icon" game, just like most of what gc.com has been reducing itself to. Kudos to GSA for not playing into that. This branch of geocaching can do without that attitude. Now if they can only tackle the waterfall problem, we're cooking with gas. Some waterfalls should qualify, like that "Falling Waters" one in Florida. But not the little insignificant manmade concrete weir in a small creek in a park in the middle of a neighborhood, built solely to keep water in the park to beautify it, or to help manage the flooding in the lower lying terrains where houses are located in some cookie-cutter neighborhoods.

So you are ugly (or so you think). So what? Who cares? Put your mug up there. On my earthcaches, I ask for photos with faces. On most of them, I even provide an example of the type of photo I want. Why? Multiple reasons. One is because I want to see your face, simple as that. I want my earthcaches filled to the brim with faces. Go take a look at one of mine - The Limestone Manifold (GC17XNX). GC17XNX Then take a look at the gallery, and tell me that is not a great collection of photos. There are over 200 photos in there, and almost all of them are smiling. No ugliness there. Another reason I want faces is that I have had people actually try to fake photos - photochopping something together or grabbing existing images from somewhere else that just shows the rock or whatever, etc. And if there is something so overpowering in yourself that you simply cannot bring yourself to showing a photo of yourself, then just leave that cache alone, and go do some of the thousands of other geocaches out there that you can do. There seems to be this belief in people that they have to be able to get every geocache out there, and that is just not true. The earthcache wants a picture of you, and if you are just not able to provide a picture of you, then it is obviously a geocache that falls outside of the criteria that defines geocaches that you are able to complete - so you should ignore it and go do something else. Similar to the geocache that is atop a sheer rock cliff - some people can't get to that one, and they shouldn't try, and they should come to terms with that and go do other ones. Now, on the other hand, I've told you that I want faces, and that is a request that I am going to put in my earthcaches, but if you were to contact me and explain your dilemma, and you did visit the earthcache, then I'm sure we could work out an exception. And about ugliness. I have lived 40something years and have seen a lot of people, and I haven't seen an ugly person yet - except for killers and such. I bet other people don't think you are ugly.

I used the pdf print options. I want them back.

I very rarely talk on these forums. I rarely even browse them. I think I have made maybe one post in the past. But I wanted to post to this topic. I ride a bicycle quite a bit. A number of times a week. I pursue it, and I work to make myself stronger. I log my miles. I have been logging my miles for as long as I have been riding as an adult. That is a long time. Logging miles is important. I only log a mile if I actually rode the mile. I have never gone into the function menus of my cycling computer/odometer and manually incremented the miles. Just a perspective.

Yes, I mean a bar, a convenience store, a drive-thru beer barn, etc. Any place situated alongside the dry county line that caters to the folks who live in that dry county, but drink.

This would be just the Mississippi. Is your opinion yes or no, Yamahammer?

There are many locations out there that lie on the county line between a "dry" county (a county/parish where alcohol cannot be sold) and a "wet" county. Usually, there is a bar or two located within five feet of that line. Some are dives and some some are more than dives. Some are sleepy, and some are loud and active. Entries would require the bar to be within a certain distance of the county line (example, 300 feet), and a photo of the bar or nightclub. It would also be required that the entry identify the two counties and distinguish which is dry.

I would like to propose a category (and manage it) where waymarks are made at points where the Mississippi River can be crossed by a mode of transportation. These would normally be bridges, but could also include ferries. Are there tunnels?

I want to say first that I may be mistaken, and I have convinced myself that I am. But I still want to know from any of you who may know whether there is a way that this could happen. This morning, my stats say I have 124 finds. I could have sworn that yesterday, my stats said 127 finds. Okay, first thought is that someone deleted my logs from their cache. I have not received anything by email that says that any logs were deleted. Hmmm, I don't think I've ever had a log deleted. I would think that the website would send an email if a log was deleted. So to test it, I asked my girlfriend to delete my log from one of her caches. Sure enough, I received a [LOG] Log Deletion Notice in my email. So since I have no other deletion notices, I must be mistaken and never had 127 in my stats. But I wonder, what if an owner completely deletes a cache altogether? Is that possible? Would logs mysteriously disappear without notice in that case? Does anyone know of any ways logs can decrease without deletion notices?

We have done this cache already, but we can still help you with this nice cache. If there is someone else who hasn't logged this cache already and wants to do this one then it's naturally alright for us. This is one kind of a locationless cache, and since I don't do locationlesses, I can also leave this for others to log a find. However, of course I can take the picture too, if no one else's interested or able to help. Thanks Harjus and Divine! Divine, I have emailed you through the geocaching website. Harjus, since you've already done one, I'll see if Divine will do it.

My username converts to E23 33.38. Looking for anyone who can help and wants to log a "find".

Hi. I am a geocacher from the other side of the world who is trying to contact someone in Sweden or Finland or neighboring country to complete a "locationless" cache called "Where's In A Name". My latitude line (which is based on my username, bennet) is E23 33.38'. If anyone in Australia can take a photo of himself/herself at any point along that latitude line, and then email me the photo, then we both can log this cache as a "find". I'm from the U.S. - Texas. Contact me by email through my user profile if you can help. Thanks!

Add me to the list of geocachers from the other side of the world who is trying to contact an Aussie to complete a "locationless" cache called "Where's In A Name". My longitude line is S23 33.38'. If anyone in Australia can take a photo of himself/herself at any point along that longitudinal line, and then email me the photo, then we both can log this cache as a "find". I'm from the U.S. - Texas. Contact me by email through my user profile if you can help. Thanks!

Hey, if you stay within the rules (no private property, RR tracks, etc.), and can still intorduce stress (by cops being there, punk kids, whatever), that makes it better in my book. Challenge, challenge, challenge...

I read your cache posting and the logs, and I'm not sure what your concern is. That there are police officers around? The posts don't seem that mixed, actually pretty benign. It looks like a good cache to me, but again, I think I'm missing your point.

I like to FTF. I think FTF is a big deal. I make special awards in my caches for the FTF. Click here to see a couple of the bona-fide engraved FTF awards I have made. Blue Dream FTF Award Kick In The Grass FTF Award The FTF competition here is definitely strong, but rain, cold, especially combined with a muddy walk over a mile or so slows down the FTF frenzy so that it does not happen the first day or two. If it is an easy cache, or if it is nice outside, the FTF happens very quickly.

The scene... ...I'm walking down the trail following my GPSr. I arrive at the cache location, and there are two beautiful women standing over the cache container. The thorns around the area have done a good job or ripping their clothing. They see me, smile seductively, and come over to me. Then that cheesy porn music starts emanating from behind the trees somewhere... ...somehow, that nevers happens.... ...sorry, sorry, sorry....

It's my real first name. Not my last name. When I get around to posting an avatar, it'll probably be an image of the real me. One benefit of the unusualism of having just one "t" in my first name... I'm not bennett69 or something.

I (male, and handsome I should add cause all the female posters are going to looking at this thread) started caching just a few months ago. About a month after that, my girlfriend started doing it with me (it kind of coincided with us reconciling after a fight). She likes caching for what it is, not just a "together" thing. We do cache together and have fun together with it, but she has gone on searches on her own, as I have. Her only problem with caching is the same as mine - time.

I've been caching about 2.5 months now. I have forty-something finds and six hides at the current time. I love it. I don't visit the forums very often, just sometimes. I'll post in about 20% of the threads that I open. I start new topics occasionally. So I guess I am not really a lurker.

You have small numbers... ummm, maybe cause you have 6200 forum posts! Caching takes some time away from the keyboard. I call myself a 1.8.