DaveA

Let's rephrase this so it is more accurate: "No one has the right to hinder or restrict the ability of another geocacher's travel bug to accomplish it's stated goals." If a TB is traveling with no stated goals then none should be presumed. If a TB is traveling with stated goals, then anyone taking the TB who won't be furthering it's stated goals is in the wrong. Given that TBs routinely are grabbed and placed in other caches without any attention being paid to the stated goals, clearly ignoring the TB's goals is common practice. In these discussions on TB hotels more than a couple of people have stated they will gladly violate the rules of the cache in favor of the rules of the TB. The rub is some have indicated they will cheerfully empty a cache of all TBs. How is this honoring the wishes of the TB owner? Is the person grabbing 10 TBs going to ensure they can further the goals of all 10? Doubtful. If your sincere intent is to help TB owners the only reasonable policy is to read the stated goals of every TB one encounters and take only those having goals one can and will fulfill or further. I believe you are also, again, mistaking your idea of what a TB should be for other people's ideas. Fast travel may not be the chief concern for some. Safe travel may be mor important. Travelling into the hands of someone new to TBs may be more important. Please stop presuming your ideas for TBs are everyones.

I haven't made that assumption at all, facts don't require that assumptions be made. Your opinion that "you don't care about your TB" being generalized to the "average TB owner doesn't care" is just that, your generalized opinion. The feelings of the average TB owner do not determine facts, in fact, feelings play no part in the process. Correct, which is why I plainly have said (mulitiple times) that my opinion is worth no more or less than yours or anyone else's. I am not the one claiming *my* experience is representative of anyone elses nor am I the one who is using language to suggest my view is everyone's view. I have pointed out several times now where some in the camp of 'archive TB hotels with rules' are the one's making statements that assume universal agreement. Yes. There is no evidence showing that in an average case a TB in a TB hotel with rules sits longer than TBs elsewhere. Cherry picking can produce any result one wishes. There is no evidence that all TB owners have a problem with TB hotels with rules, but there is evidence that *some* Tb owners aren't in the least bit bothered by such caches. There are reasons to appreciate TB hotels with rules. Among them are a belief that this will allow more new people to encounter a TB, that the average TB IQ of a person seeking a hotel is higher than that of those seeking a traditional cache and therefore there is less risk of the TB being mistaken as a trade item to be kept and other reasons. You can't presume to speak for anyone other than yourself what the goals for a TB are. For mine, the goal is for people (including myself) to have some fun with them. That's it. You don't have the right to assume anything about *everyone*. You are assuming that all TB owners value fast movement above safe movement or movement to new folks rather than TB hounds looking to up their stats. It's funny how people's stats are compared in discussions like this. My stats are better than your stats so my opinion is right . Here is a clue for you, take a look at the join date associated with this account. Compare it to your own. Try to avoid judging a book by it's cover as there is a lot between the covers that you simply don't know. Same goes for you, Hula, since you also not only presume to speak for everyone, but also felt the need to pull out the "I am right by virtue of superior stats.' card. So, taking something many seek after and leaving nothing of it's kind for the next person is a 'good policy'? Wow. In this discussion I see a premium emphasis on the presumed wishes of the TB owner which would be fine if anyone understood the priorities of all TB owners, but what about the cachers who would like to find a TB? Do they not count? TB owners (myself included) certainly ought to understand that without other cachers their TB wouldn't ever move anywhere. Certainly letting them have some fun is a fair payment for the moving along? Is it really terrible to suggest that leave one take one potentially spreads the fun of TBs a bit further? At least one TB hotel owner stated the reason for their having a trade policy suggestion was due to folks who seem to feel entitled to empty a cache of all TBs regardless of how many there are in the cache and leave nothing behind for the next person. I think most of the time those who say they would grab 10 (or whatever number) of TBs from caches to 'help them on their goal' are simply deceiving themselves. If one really cared about moving TBs and not simply about their own stats it would be easy enough to wait a few weeks after a TB has been put into a cache and then go retrieve it. This would allow new folks to grab a TB as well as ensure that no TB sat too long. Just going out and grabbing every one without leaving any is pure selfishness no matter how hard one tries to justify the action in their own mind as being noble rather than selfish. As a TB owner I would rather the horders leave mine behind for the new person seeking to find their first TB or the person who wants to help the TB fulfill it's goal than end up in the hands of a hoarder who is just going to dump it off somewhere without helping it on it's mission. This isn't my suggestion. It was my suggestion that you don't speak for all TB owners therefore you should avoid language in your posts that suggests you do.

You are assuming you understand the wishes of every TB owner. You clearly don't. A TB hotel with a trade policy, according to the owners of such hotels that have posted in the forums, is to try and reduce the number of TBs that go missing when placed in regular caches as well as to try and maintain a place where someone trying to get started with TBs can go and find one to take when they give. Regardless of how well this policy fulfills it's goal, it is a fine intent and is quite different than the claims made that they are rule mongers or TB horders. I have no problem with a rule|guideline|suggestion| that might result in my TB falling into the hands of someone looking for one. I would prefer my TB not fall into the hands of someone who feels taking 10 TBs from a cache is the 'right' thing to do. In my opinion this is pure greed being justified by the greedy one as a noble act. I can't control this, but I would much rather newbies be able to find my TB and get into the game than have someone with 1000 travel bug finds grab mine along with 9 other ones. As I have said in other posts, please stop presuming to represent more people than you actually do. You represent only yourself, you don't represent me. My views are different than yours and are no more or less valid. You really can't say that ignoring the TB hotel policy is helping other cachers unless you know that all other cachers want that kind of help. I don't.

What you do is you look in the upper left area for the button that reads "Directions". Click on it and you will be asked for your start and end point. Provide that and a route is chosen for you. This chosen route may or may not be the route you plan to take. Assuming it is what you want you then click File > Save As. What will be saved to a .kml file is your route info. You then upload this file to GC.com on the create a route page. From here there will be an option to create a pocket query from it. In the event Google Earth selects a route other than what you want (common) there is a way to get the route you want, but it isn't elegant or friendly. You will have to use the placemark feature and place placemarks on the route you wish to travel. You then click the destination placemark and a box pops up and asks you if you want it to travel to or travel from. Indicated travel to. Then click on another placemark and select it as the starting point and you then get directions from placemark to placemark. You may need to build several routes depending on the number of placemark you have to use to get google to give you the route you want. If the above paragraph is as clear as mud, you basically use placemarks to break the route up into smaller pieces so the route from placemark 1 to placemark 2 is what you want. Trial and error are necessary. For example there is a 35 mile stretch I travel a few times per week and I have to break it into 2 routes to get google to do what I wanted.

The idea isn't to put the TB *in the prison*, the idea is to take the TB *to the prison* and have it 'liberate' the TBs in it. The logs for the TB are on it's own page, not the cache page of the TB hotel. In other words the logs show months of heavy activity including spending time in other countries, but not one single person has yet to use the bug for it's intended purpose. I am not saying there is nobody out there who would *like* to use it for that purpose, just that every single person to pick up the bug did so while completely ignoring the fact that they would not or could not help it on it's mission. That's what I find sad and funny at the same time. My finding humor in the logs is entirely unrelated to the fact that I find TB hotels with rules or suggestions designed to prevent TB hording or allowing others to have the opportunity to get thier hands on a TB harmless. I mean seriously, forget about the issue at hand for just a moment and look at the logs for a TB with a clearly stated goal and how the goals haven't once been met for all the travelling it has done. Isn't that hilarious in a sad way? Getting back to the issue at hand, I think this TB not having once been helped on it's goal illustrates precisely why rules regarding anything released into the wild are pointless. Nobody seems to care. Make a take one leave one rule with the best of intentions and people will ignore the rule either because they 'know' better or simply because they don't read. Attach a goal to a TB and people will ignore the goal either because they don't care or they don't read. Put a trade even, trade up or don't trade 'suggestion' on the cache page and watch the cache contents steadily degrade over time anyway. Go to a cache without bringing something to write with and it pretty much guarantees the cache will have had all the writing instruments mistaken as trade items. Pointless to make rules, pointless to worry about rules one doesn't much like. People will do as they please either because they feel entitled to or simply because they didn't notice the flashing neon sign listing the rule|suggestion.

Don't take what I am saying personally, I am not trying to insult you in any way. I am not 'questioning your numbers or their validity'. I am pointing out that without stats from the database you cannot make any statements concerning how long TBs stay in any cache type on average. It really doesn't matter how many finds you have. Basing a belief on personal experience is like saying "I think so and so will easily win the next presidential election because EVERYONE I know is voting for him|her". Given that TBs go missing for months with no explanation, some never to reappear is a TB hotel policy really that significant? Given that a TB with the stated goal of 'liberating' TBs from TB prisons has gone around the world already (see other thread) and hasn't once actually resulted in the liberation of any TBs enough evidence that very few people are actually doing anything to 'respect the TB owner's wishes' in regards to the TB's goal? Honestly I don't see what all the fuss is about and I think calling for archival or the immature 'prison' bookmark are just over the line in a controlling, rule making way. Play our way or we will make you sorry. Make all the rules you want and people still aren't going to feel any need to play your way, my way or any way other than their own.

If anything that TB is proof positive of the abysmal reading comprehension of people It has yet to see any TBs 'liberated', and in one log the individual stated they dropped it off in a TB 'jail'. LOL, I don't think putting it in a TB jail was the bug's goal. As luck would have it the cache the individual labeled a jail is on the 'good ones' bookmark. I don't know if I should laugh or cry concerning this. On the one hand it is funnier than all get out that this bug has traveled the world already, but not a single person 'liberated' any TBs per the bug's goal. It is also downright comical that somebody put it in what they thought was a TB prison and it wasn't. I think I need a beer and then I will go read the logs for that TB again. Good reading, thanks for the link.

What stats? Have you posted stats and I missed them? Are you referring to where you said you looked at some TB 'prisons' and some had fast movement and some had some TBs sitting awhile? If so I did see that, but I don't see that your belief or mine are proven by that. If anything your 'stats' simply say that 'In some caches TBs move fast and in others they move quickly'. There is no comparison with other caches in the area to see what the norm for an area is. It also doesn't take into account the time of year or climate. If a TB sits for 4 frigid, snow covered months that isn't difficult to understand. Really, I don't think you, I, or anyone else without access to the database can pull any meaningful stats on this. Maybe instead of petitioning for the archival of a cache type you don't like you might want to petition the powers that be to run some queries to try and get a reasonable idea of whether or not TB hotels with a 1 for 1 rule are detrimental to the goal of keeping TBs moving or not? With respect, your sample size is too small to be relevant. You are, I believe, falling into the temptation of wanting to believe something is true. I believe you believe what you say you believe, but I doubt what you believe is factually accurate. I have no evidence that your are correct or incorrect in your belief, and neither do you. Your petition for the archival of caches you do not like is based upon a solid lack of any evidence that these hotels are causing the harm you *believe* they are. Change your goal from getting a cache type archived to petitioning the powers that be to run some queries to generate meaningful stats and I will gladly sign *that* petition. Unless, until we all have some actual data to go on this is all speculative hot air.

You seem incapable of grasping the fact that every TB is owned by another geocacher, this is not an opinion, it is a fact. The owner of every TB is free to set whatever mission they want, this is a fact as well. If you want your TB to sit around until someone puts another TB in it's place then you are free to set that as the mission because it is your TB. If I want your TB to sit around until it is replaced by another TB I am infringing on your rights because it is your TB, this is very simple stuff and it is factually correct. I grasp the point you are making. I simply think you are being presumptuous in a couple ways. First you are assuming the average TB owner really cares one way or another if their TB spends time in a cache 'with rules' or not. If their TB spends 30 days in a cache with rules and it spends 40 days in a cache with no rules do you think they mind their TB having been in the cache with rules? Secondly you are assuming that a TB spends more time, on average, in a TB hotel with a 1-1 trade policy than it does in other nearby caches of comparable difficulty. Given that TB hotels attract people who are interested in TBs, it would seem this is unlikely to be the case. My point in explaining that I own a TB and don't care if it gets put in a TB hotel with rules isn't to say my opinion is 'better' than yours. The point is that you are assuming you are fighting some noble battle on behalf of TB owners everywhere and you may not be. Unless someone can come up with some solid, non cherry picked stats that show TBs remain longer in TB hotels with rules than they do in comparable caches in the area I think this entire crusade is a waste of energy. If they do, in fact, sit longer in TB hotels with rules then you have a point. So, does anyone have any actual stats on this? Is it possible for someone behind the scenes to run a query against the database to show what the truth actually is? Cuz if, on average, TBs move at the same rate or better in TB hotels with rules as they do in other area caches of comparable difficulty I don't see the problem.

Actually I don't own a TB hotel of any kind, but I do own a TB and I have no problem with it spending time in a so called prison. I really doubt it is going to take any longer to leave the 'prison' than the next nearest cache that is of comparable difficulty to get to and find. I figure those seeking the TB hotel are more likely to know what they are doing in regards to TBs than the seekers of regular caches who may have never heard of a travel bug. So, please cease this practice of speaking for more than oneself when expressing one's personal opinion. Your opinion isn't the same as mine. You are not fine with a 1 for 1 rule on caches where your TB might end up, I am fine with it. Your opinion is worth no more and no less than mine. Now, it would appear that Jeremy has seen this thread since he moved it to this forum and it doesn't look like TB 'prisons' are going to get archived or that the issue was of enough importance to him to even warrant a comment on the topic. I am sure this upsets you a bit and I understand. I suggested that public bookmarks be moderated to prevent negative, confrontational speech from spilling out of the forums and onto cache pages. While I haven't heard anything my guess is nothing will happen in that regard either. So, can we all just move along now? Your 'side' gets to manipulate a new feature to attack and insult owners of caches you don't like right on their own cache page and there is nothing they can do about it. Isn't that enough for you? My prediction, if this ranting about 'prisons' keeps up, is that the effort will be counter productive and you will see people actively sending messages to the owner of the 'prison' bookmark so their new TB hotel can get added to the list.

Is this a really remote area where perhaps there aren't any caches? Have you checked to see what the search radius is?

You keep refering to these as prisons, but you have yet to show that a travel bug, on avergage, spends more time before moving along in the TB hotel (with or without 1 for 1 trading rules) than in any other nearby cache. Until you do this I am unclear on why I or anyone else should desire to support your crusade. We now even have public bookmarks showing up on cache owner's pages labelling their caches TB prisons. Mature. Just the kind of group I want to sign up with. Get some facts to back up your rants please.

I understand but again the casual player will NEVER be going to one of my wilderness caches,and nothing is confusing for those that take the time to read what it is they are getting into ..but i do understand your point and the rules have to babysit even those not capable of governing their own particapation in a game they choose to play.. At the risk of stirring up a North Korea sized hornet's nest you do realize GC.com is just a listing site and has no control whatsoever over your cache other than to list or not to list right? I mean if you have some remote cache and you want to put items in it that aren't intended for kids, just put a note in your cache description to the effect that "This cache is not intended for children" and leave it at that. Fair warning is given. From that point who is to say you or a visitor put the fifth of Jack Daniels or pack of Marlboros or old copy of Hustler in the cache? I mean I am certainly not encouraging you to abuse the system, but at the same time if there is something you really feel the need to put into a cache there is nothing stopping you from doing so. I encourage you to be safe, be responsible and legal, but if you are all that and you still wish to have something in a cache that isn't always universally agreed upon as kosher, there is nothing stopping you from putting it in your or someone else's cache. One of the things I find really funny is reading the logs where someone finds a utility knife in a cache. The logs often read like this "L <stupid trade item> and noticed a highly dangerous and offensive swiss army knife type thing in the cache and so I dutifully removed it ASAP." Well you just know the person was tickled pink with the find and is having fun on the log page in a 'wink wink' manner. Go to a caching event and talk to people and I think you will find folks are far more open minded than what is represented on the forums.

In your above comments you appear to be falling back on a live and let live stance. That's fine, but it seems inconsistent when you previously said "And your last statement about people disagreeing and threatening to put their caches on a "lamest" list, without even having done them is just childish. People can have differing opinions, don't turn it into a playground tantrum." Here is the thing: My personal opinion is that the public bookmark bashing TB hotels is beyond unconstructive. Who really needs a public bookmark pointing out that one person's opinion is they are 'prisons'? How will anyone benefit from that? What will the bookmark tell them they didnt' already know? What constructive purpose does it serve? So, why is it fine to have a public bookmark bashing hundreds of people's TB hotels, but I would be 'childish' and having a 'playground tantrum' if I decided to create a public bookmark list criticising the creator of the list's caches? Maybe I would call my list "The intolerant bigots caches" or something similarly inflamatory. Would you then think it was OK? Constructive? Healthy to have on the main site cache pages? Don't worry, I could do it, but I won't|wouldn't. I am not that childish to misuse a great new feature to take my personal opinions off the forums and start ruining the experience for hundreds of cache owners at a time on the main site. That there are some who justify|support this use of bookmarks just confounds me.

True, forum junkies like us thrive on the angst, but are the cache pages on the GC.com site really the place for venting opinions? Seriously. Are they? Isn't that more what the forums are for?

Because I haven't the slightest problem with it. Some do though and check in once and stay away. Surely if you have ever met up with any cachers you have heard the comments regarding the forums? I am pleased you think so. I agree. I haven't done this and have no intentions of doing this. I was giving an example of how easy it is to cause strife not simply on forums where disagreement and debate are common, but on the GC.com site where it isn't so common. The TB prison bookmark shows up on cache owner's pages whether they wish it to or not. This seems to me to be inviting discord and angst. I really doubt this was what TPTB intended when they created bookmarks. The TB prison bookmark serves no constructive purpose. It exists solely to piss off cache owners whose page the bookmark appears on and cause division among cachers who would prefer to stay away from the strife. People have opinions. Cache pages are not the place for freedom of speech, they are a place to list a cache and log visits. Forums are fine for strongly expressed opinions. I haven't. I am not the one who has created a public bookmark that shows up on hundreds of cache pages bashing them without the cache owner's consent and leaving the cache owner no choice but to accept it or archive their listing here and go elsewhere. The TB prison public bookmark is immature, childish, adversarial, promotes nothing constructive and in my opinion ought to be removed by the powers that be ASAP if they don't want the usual level of disagreement and angst on the forums spilling over to the relatively placid cache pages and logs.

Well, perhaps you could enlist the assistance of the powers that be at Groundspeak to show that on average a TB is sitting longer in a TB hotel than in any other cache in the area and you would have a point worth discussing. Until then it is pure unfounded speculation. TB hotels seem like a good place for TBs to get grabbed and moved rather than a regular cache where folks who never heard of a TB grab them as trade items not knowing any better.

edited to avoid another mod PM

There are all sort of blue laws on the books. In Wisconsin where I live car dealerships are all closed by law on Sundays. Every other business type can be open on Sunday if they wish (including strip clubs and head shops), but not car dealerships. No idea what kind of anti thinking went into that law. Probably dates back to horse and buggy trading days. After 9pm any day of the week you can't buy hard alcohol or wine, but you can buy 20 cases of beer if you wish. You can also drive to the bar and drink all the wine and booze you want after 9pm and then drive home drunk, but you can't buy it at a store, drive home sober and consume it at your residence. Never try to impose logic on a legislative body. It just makes your head hurt.

OK, for the sake of clarification my 'fashion blunder' statement was an attempt at *obvious*(to me) humor that nobody else got. I don't care much what I look like at any time let alone while trouncing through the woods. While I do not hunt, nearly all the males in my family do and all of my friends do. I live in Wisconsin which is a huge hunting state so I certainly get hunting and hunter's attitudes. Still, I don't bother with wearing orange. Then again I don't really tempt fate either. I don't go out onto prime hunting lands during hunting season (gun deer season). When I am out caching and start hearing gunshots from areas there shouldn't be gunshots (not uncommon this time of year) I leave the area as I figure the people shooting the guns are the same idiots who shoot at moving bushes and kill people and think they have a legal leg to stand on by saying "I couldn't see that it wasn't a deer I was blindly shooting at". I guess my perceptions are colored by the fact that I live in the SE part of the state any pretty much every hunter goes 'up north' to hunt as in the SE there are so many restrictions in place on discharging firearms it isn't worth trying. That and the public hunting land is so highly used that hunting isn't worth trying. If one is hunting in SE Wisconsin they are on private land, not public.

Your cache page is a logical place to add a public bookmark that indicates your cache is a prison that traps and hinders TB's. In my opinion public bookmarks that appear on cache pages without the cache owner's consent simply take the argumentative, ill will filled nature of these forums and spill it out amongst the general caching population that doesn't bother with these forums because they are so filled with ill will and arguments. I don't see any good coming from it and think TPTB would be wise to have 'approvers' for public bookmark lists just the same as they do for cache placements and forum posts. Not everyone thinks the take one leave one TB hotels are good or bad and I think a public bookmark list showing up unsolicited on a cache page to slam the cache is about as helpful as allowing the general public to post political comments on cache pages. It will universally anger the cache owner and cause strife and division. Fine for the forums, but not on cache pages. Edited to add: If anyone disagrees with what I have said concerning public bookmark lists, please send me a list of all your caches so I can add them to my public 'lamest caches in history' list which will then show up on all your cache pages. If you wouldn't like that then please don't abuse bookmarks to express your negative opinion of other people's caches.

You are using your cache to trap and hold the TB's of other geocachers. Your hotel cache is restrictive and it hinders TB movements. Your approach may be rewarding to you but it is completely devoid of any respect for TB owners. Your cache page is a logical place to add a public bookmark that indicates your cache is a prison that traps and hinders TB's. You imply that anyone should be able to dsiscern that the TB's goals take precednece yet you make a cache page that clearly ignores the wishes of all TB owners and attempts to restrict TB movement. If as you say it should be clear to everyone why is it not clear to you? As a TB owner I simply disagree with you. Yes, I want it to move, but I don't wish it to move into the hands of someone who doesn't know what a TB is and will mistake it as a trade item. I released my TB into a hotel figuring the odds are better that a finder of a TB hotel will understand what a TB is than if it is found in a regular cache filled with trade items. I also don't have any problem with a 'take one leave one' policy. In my view I may be the owner of the TB, but I don't own other people's fun or experiences. I would rather my bug sat waiting for someone who would leave another bug behind so the next seeker could also enjoy picking up a bug than it fall into the hands of some numbers freak who would take 10 TBs from a cache and leave nothing behind while believing themselves to be noble rather than incredibly selfish. So, please don't presume to speak for all TB owners with your comments. Your views do not represent mine. I just released my first bug and have several more tags waiting to go and it is my intention to release every single one in a TB hotel and have no problem with a take one leave one policy, in fact I prefer it over the bugs being placed into random caches where they get mistaken for trade items and taken out of circulation.

While I understand the philosophy that TBs are meant to move therefore any rule which even theoretically limits their movement is a ***BAD THING***, I don't really agree with it in practice. Many cachers could care less about travel bugs. Until very recently I was one of them. Many cachers are really into travel bugs. To each their own. If a cache is set up to be a take one leave one TB hotel I don't think this really results in travel bugs sitting around rather than moving. First of all those into travel bugs more than likely are releasing their own or holding onto one or more they picked up from a regular cache anyway so it isn't like the requirement to leave one is all that burdensome. Second, the very idea of a travel bug hotel all but ensures those seeking it are in fact interested in travel bugs. This is quite a bit different than a regular cache with a bug in it where the seekers may or may not care at all about travel bugs and some finders may even mistake the travel bug for a swag item. As long as the TB hotel isn't a 5/5 cache I doubt that TBs stay in them longer than they do in regular caches and I suspect (but don't know) that they probably are more often picked up by people who know what to do with them than when obtained from regular caches. When I placed my first TB into the wild yesterday I put it in a TB hotel with no 'take one leave one' rule. Well, I dropped my bug off, but didn't take any as there weren't any. I was slightly surprised that there were no TBs to be swapped for since it was a TB hotel. Perhaps the owner of a take one, leave one TB hotel simply wants to provide a haven for TBs to get picked up by those who know what they are AND provide a place for newbies to TBs to be able to pick one up while they drop their first one off? Again, I really doubt any cache which is advertised as a TB hotel results in TBs being imprisoned there for any longer than TBs usually sit in other caches in that geographic area.

I think this whole 'don't wear cotton thing' is a case of people talking past each other trying to make a point. If I may be so bold, I will step in and say this: If you are wet, expectly or unexpectedly whether from snow, rain, falling in water or something else, you will appreciate having not worn cotton. If you are wearing cotton and you start shivering uncontrollably, you are better off naked than continuing to wear it. Having said that if you don't intend to be anywhere near water in cold weather and you aren't straying further from civilization than you could crawl to with a broken leg, it really doesn't matter what you wear as you aren't going to be exposed to anything long enough for it to be lethal. If you will stray farther from civilization than you can crawl to with a broken leg, carry a cell phone. If the cell phone won't work in that area then start looking into specialized gear and other preparedness measures. Now, what gear do I recomend for cool to cold weather in *dry* conditions? Jeans, tshirt and flannel zipper front overshirt. Gloves and hat too if cold enough to be warranted. If you will be stopping to rest for periods of time then thermal underwear is nice, but if you plan to keep moving it makes things too hot too fast. Just my 2 cents. Keep in mind I value quick, easy and light over heavily supplied, well thought out and overprepared and heavy. Others prioritize things differently.

Well stands to reason because the first article was an opinion piece in the editorial section. The second was a regular article. I can accept that, but it would seem to contradict the 'no bashing' idea. Would an 'editorial' piece reflecting a negative opinion of geocaching.com make the cut? Really my only point in this is it would appear that early on there was a good deal of support for the concept, but that support died by being forced into a geocaching.com centric view that expressed hostility toward anything not geocaching.com. My advice to future endeavors would be to recognize that while geocaching.com is the granddaddy of them all and with good reason, shunning alternatives and even bashing them under the guise of 'editorials' alienates a lot of people. Perhaps so many people that subscribers are left feeling ripped off that they paid for a subscription, but the mag couldn't get enough volunteers to even honor the subscription. Just a thought.