Trinity's Crew

Okay, now I'm very embarrassed, but even more grateful. Thank you very much Jeremy.

Jeremy, Thanks for your response. The tracking number is 178440, but don't worry about it. As I mentioned in a previous post, Nate did take care of the most important thing. He moved the archived cache from the old account and that makes me and my kids very happy. They actually hid it. I stayed on the boat. After re-reading my posts, I realized two things: 1. I'm being a pest. 2. I don't need the old start date. After giving it a little more thought, I realized it was just a vanity thing anyway. Please accept my apologies. You have done more than enough already. Consider me satisfied and a little embarrassed. Thanks, TC

I post a DNF when I feel that I have spent a reasonable amount of time searching the area where I believe the cache is located. If other factors play into it, (GPS not co-operating. non-cachers in the search area, etc..) I usually just post a note describing the issues that hindered me from completing the cache.

Thank you for the advice! They did indeed transfer my old (archived) cache over to my new account. (Thanks!) I am very happy about that. Your post also mentioned that Jeremy had recently changed an account to reflect the older start date. I found the post and I am keeping my fingers crossed... So here goes... Jeremy, I would like to thank GC.com (and Nate) for transferring our old cache to our new account. My kids (and I) were thrilled when we found the old cache log and it was great that you were able to make it part of our history. If you could update our current account (trinity's crew) to reflect the original start date I would be eternally grateful although I know it is a lot to ask and I will understand if you are unable to do so. I know that this request might be viewed as petty, but I am proud to have been associated with geocaching in Maryland almost from the start. We originally registered on July 27th, 2001. Thanks either way. Trinity's Crew Edited for humility Jeremy, This is my last appeal. If you feel it is unwarranted (or just too big a pain in the butt) please post to this thread or drop me a PM to tell me to stop pestering you. Even if you are too busy/irritated/PO'ed to reply to me I'll stop pestering you. Thanks, TC

Since I became a paying member, my fears have subsided a bit. Seriously though, Groundspeak has always vowed to keep basic membership free. My biggest fear is that cache maggots may force the site to become pay only some day.

My close caching buddy accuses me of being a Geo-geek for perusing and posting on these forums. My wife, also a cacher, accused me of being a geek after posting this log. Edit: Spelling

Sage advice, Cachew. As I mentioned, my frustration level is directly proportional to the time I have at my disposal. Poking around or parking wherever on weekends is no big deal. Of couse with the price of gas these days, being lost a lot can start to add up. I was just a bit frustrated yesterday while trying to find a usable entrance for a couple of caches in a state park. Initially, I was in a residential area that bordered the park with no access unless I wanted to cut through somebody's yard. Anyway after trying a couple of other entrances, I found the area that I believe will take me to the right trailhead, just in time to turn around and go back to the office. Oh well...there's always today!

I enjoy caching at lunch with another member of the crew and I am totally frustrated by the lack of parking directions that many caches supply. For instance, there are many, many caches hidden in the Patapsaco Valley State Park system that runs through a large area of my state. (Maryland) The problem is, there are dozens of entrances to this park system within 10 miles of my workplace. Many (or most) of these are not marked on a map and roads that appear to be close to the cache are not usually close to a park entrance. So, am I in the minority, or are others frustrated by a lack of directions to the nearest (or at least convenient) parking for a cache? P.S. I am not nearly as frustrated on weekends when I have more time to kill. Driving around trying to find the appropriate parking place is not nearly as frustrating when you aren't punching a clock! Edit: Clarity

I assume that this possibility has already been brought up in other threads dealing with vandalism. I know that Jeremy does not want to dissuade the non-paying GC community from hiding and seeking caches, (which is very admirable) but if the practice of trashing caches gets out of hand, it seems that the only logical (and regrettable) solution would be to make this a pay only site. I hope that this does not have to happen. Edit: Spelling

As near as I can tell (4) is my current record. The good news is that should be easy to beat!

Since SBA logs are automatically sent to the reviewers, I see no reason NOT to delete those that appear to be inappropriate. The reviewers should be able to determine whether the SBA logs have merit and they will probably take the appropriate actions. SBA logs that are unwarranted could cause prospective cachers to ignore a perfectly good cache. RK, I feel confident from reading the forums that you would not delete a valid SBA log. You would go out and repair any problems that needed to be attended to, or archive the cache yourself, if necessary. My only concern is that inexperienced cachers may not be able to make the same call.

I think he means Starting at 12:00 AM and ending at 11:59:59 PM on the same day. A 24 hour period that spans 2 days, (i.e. 10:00 AM Tuesday to 10:00 AM Wednesday) would cause your finds to be "split" over a 2 day period in the logs. It's really just semantics, though. 24 hours is 24 hours no matter how you slice it.

My father always said to avoid talking about religion and politics while drinking. Consequently, I can never discuss religion or politics. I personally see nothing wrong with a religiously themed cache. If I was bothered by it, I just wouldn't find it. Others will (and do) disagree. That's their right.

I submitted my cache (my first) on Saturday morning and got a note from the reviewer late last night. I need to work out a few kinks. You know, little things, like I didn't get a permit for a State Park placement and used an ammo box, which is prohibited in a State Park. (Maryland regulations) I emailed back with a couple of questions this morning and I am eagerly awaiting his response!

I am not SURE that the administrators of GC.COM WERE advocating a multicache in this particular instance, but I certainly got that impression. Many of these posts, and the guideline itself, lead one to believe that if you place too many traditionals (or micros) along a defined path (or trail) the approver MAY REQUIRE (changed from MAY SUGGEST) that you place a multi-cache. In any event. how many is too many? How many stages are too many when setting up a multi? How many traditional caches constitute "too many" caches when placing caches for others to find?

That is sad... Which cache was it? You ignored my post (in which I was only curious to read the logs leading up to the archival) and flamed the poster who questioned the validity of the archival altogether. I AM saddened to see a cache archived for the reasons stated, so I must ask again.. Which cache was it?

Yes, (Depending on who you talk to...)

Jeremy, You may (or may not) want to limit the number of finds for any given cacher on any given day, but ultimately that upper limit is defined by the cache saturation in a given area and any given cachers ambition. Is your desire/goal to limit/prohibit "power trails" driven by your concern over recent decisions by some jurisdictions to limit/prohibit cache placements? If so, that is understandable given the position you are in. However, a pro-active stance (one in which you involve active, responsible Geocachers) that allays the fears of land managers would be much more productive in solving future disputes. (Let's face it... disguising 10-20 caches as a multi-cache is going to bite you sooner or later.) The parkland that we are fretting over is designed for public use. The addition of geocaches does not substantially add to the number of people who will frequent these parks. (Even frequently visited caches probably don't average more than two or three logs a day.) If we encourage/sponsor CITO events in any given park, or try to educate the decision makers as to who we are and what we do, we are more likely to win allies than create enemies. Any thoughts or rebuttals are welcome! (I have my flame retardant PJs on!) Edit: added _ or try to educate the decision makers as to who we are and what we do,

Who's eremy? But on that same note, where the FORK did that come form?

What? Are you kidding you suck-up? Are you waiting for KA to approve a power trail that you submitted? Just kidding! KA you are doing an admirable job of keeping the posters on topic and keeping us all in bounds. (And do you think you could approve my cache? It's been over 82 hours! ) Also, for the most part, the posters have not needed a lot of moderation. Kudos to them as well. Edit: Time for approval

That's what makes the forums fun! Unfortunately, that sometimes makes it hard to seperate the wheat from the chaff. For that matter, I believe that just about every poster could fall on either side of that common expression depending on the topic and someone elses view on it. P.S. We also like that you allow us to complain a lot!

Mopar, I think I know the answer from subsequent posts, but do you mean (5) caches per cacher per park or (as I interpreted your post as written) (5) caches per park? There is a huge difference. Please clarify. (If you already have and I missed it in my haste, oops, sorry!)

I agree with others in this thread who point out that a 20 part multi-cache causes as much (potential) damage to the environment as 20 regular caches. (maybe more because micros CAN be harder to locate) Also, suggesting (or requiring) a multi-cache in favor of traditional caches is, as previously stated, dishonest and dangerous because once land managers figure out that twenty caches (usually clues hidden in micro containers) are actually placed in the park they will be furious that the GC.COM website misled them. Seeking permission from Land Managers prior to placing caches for the purpose of creating "power trails" is advisable and should satisfy GC.COM and anyone else who might object. In addition, I must agree that once a single part of a multi cache goes missing, the entire cache is out of commision. Not so with 20 individual caches. In that case, one missing cache is just that. ONE missing cache. A disabled stage of a multi-cache requires IMMEDIATE attention if the intent of the placement was to encourage others to enjoy a beautiful hike. One missing traditional cache could be disabled until you could get to it (one to two weeks) with no impact on the rest of the caches. I am NOT about numbers, but I must tell you that my family (specifically, my 12 year old son and his friends who frequently cache with us) enjoys finding traditional caches much more than multis or micros.. We love the thrill of the hunt, and (hopefully) the find of a traditional cache. We love to poke around inside the container to see what might be in there, what might be worth trading for, or maybe just leaving treasures for the next cacher to find. I don't believe that there are any "Power Trails" particularly close to where I live, but I'm going to start looking for them. They look like a LOT of fun!

Thank you for the advice! They did indeed transfer my old (archived) cache over to my new account. (Thanks!) I am very happy about that. Your post also mentioned that Jeremy had recently changed an account to reflect the older start date. I found the post and I am keeping my fingers crossed... So here goes... Jeremy, I would like to thank GC.com (and Nate) for transferring our old cache to our new account. My kids (and I) were thrilled when we found the old cache log and it was great that you were able to make it part of our history. If you could update our current account (trinity's crew) to reflect the original start date I would be eternally grateful although I know it is a lot to ask and I will understand if you are unable to do so. I know that this request might be viewed as petty, but I am proud to have been associated with geocaching in Maryland almost from the start. We originally registered on July 27th, 2001. Thanks either way. Trinity's Crew Edited for humility