Geofellas

Not New Hampshire - when they filmed an episode of "The West Wing" in our town (which is not in New Hampshire - or even in the USA!!)

Squirrel - Dray or Scurry Bee - Swarm, Grist or Hive

Drat - you just solved my next puzzle cache

Up to GCZYR6 allocated

I bet that they will not let it run all the way to GCZZZZ. If they did then there would be a huge hit on the servers as everyone stacked up a bunch of cache listings (all with the "cache is ready to go" thing unchecked of course) waiting to hit the "Go" button at what they thought was the right time. I think we will be surprised when GC10000 happens before anyone expects it to. The lack of caches called GCZ, GCZZ, and GCZZZ - or even anywhere leading up to those numbers - provides a precedent. If I were running the show that's what I would do to save undue strain on my system.

Not sure it is really base 31 but it could be I suppose - if so then I guess we should expect to see GC10000 Instructively none of the following caches seem to exist: GCZ GCZZ GCZZZ (makes you wonder if GCZZZZ will ever exist ) GC0 GC00 GC000 GC0000 GC01 GC001 GC0001 but GC10 GC100, and GC1000 do exist

Yes - log a "found it" as well as a "needs maintenance"

Puzzles are typically not expected to be solved "in the field". For those who seek extra mental challenge (and there are all types involved in caching so we should all acknowledge that not everyone likes the same kinds of cache as others), an imaginative puzzle can be part of the fun. There are a LOT of cachers round here, and I suspect worldwide, who share that opinion. I typically try to cater to all tastes by setting a mixture of straightforward caches and puzzle caches. I personally tend to get more fun out of solving puzzles (which I can do when I can't get away from the house for example) than simply going to some coordinates somewhere (although some of my most memorable finds have been of the latter type)

Javascript - not allowed for security reasons. That is reasonable. I don't see this as a software issue at all - it seems to be more a matter of concern over negative reactions to caches that have issues with the listing not working as intended. Which brings me back to the point I made earlier on which no-one has yet commented - "why is the obligation that the cache owner has to maintain the availability of the information required to solve the puzzle any different from the obligation that the cache owner has to maintain the availability of the actual cache container?" If the cache container goes missing or is broken, the owner can either fix the problem, or disable or even archive the cache listing. Often the owner won't find out about it until someone has made the trek to locate the cache and reported it missing. Similarly, if the cache description is "broken" or "missing" the owner can either fix the problem, or disable or even archive the cache listing. Whoever discovers the problem can post a Needs Maintenance or an SBA just the same if they feel so inclined. And in this case people would not have wasted their time going out to find the thing before reporting the problem. This would typically be less aggravating than having the actual cache container go missing. I would like to hear TPTB's thoughts on this logic. Edit: fix typos

A further thought on this topic - why is the obligation that the cache owner has to maintain the availability of the information required to solve the puzzle any different from the obligation that the cache owner has to maintain the availability of the actual cache container? I fear this may be a "knee jerk" reaction to some particular incidents - but I can only speculate. It would be helpful if TPTB could provide some definitive comments on this subject so that it can be discussed rationally with the community before a decision is made that could cause upset.

Well - I can understand the rationale - to some extent - but, unless GC.com allows broader capabilities in the type of webpages you can create, and stops munging uploaded image files, there would be many puzzle caches that could no longer be created which would be a shame. The following caches of mine would no longer be possible for example: A 440 (I acknowledge that this does have the now banned BGSOUND tag in it - so if you don't like sound, turn it off or don't click on the link - even without this the cache would not be possible in another form were this rule to be implemented) Steganography Listen for the Numbers all of which have got generally positive comments. I fear this might end up being a case of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" unless gc.com provide satisfactory alternatives for puzzle caches like these. There is usually a good and valid reason why people host parts of their cache description off site. Would this also mean that one could no longer include links to coordinate checker sites? I would hope that TPTB will carefully think through all the implications before implementing such a policy.

Why would it not be GC00000 ? Edit: Incidentally I just got GCZY18 - still a ways to go...

That seems like a major advantage to me. Why would anyone hold onto 50 TBs? TBs are supposed to move not be held onto. Perhaps it would encourage those selfish people who hoard TBs to do what they are supposed to with them. If you were to say "but this includes all my own TBs/geocoins" then there are various ways to avoid getting irritated by the long listing such as marking them as being in an unknown location or dropping them into your own, not yet approved, cache that you keep for exactly that purpose.

Of course everyone who attended The Bone Chilling Hunt for Leweena Gizzardstone actually had to put the body back together again!! (Apparently there is the possibility for a sequel)

Create a cache listing with coordinates of your home (maybe called "Home Sweet Home" or something equally corny), or wherever else you want if you are concerned about someone figuring it out (not that they can with this approach), but don't ever submit it for approval. Log the bug into it et voilà I beg to differ, you still need to be careful with even this approach, if you are concerned about the privacy aspect, it is still very possible to find the coordinates of any cache (yes, even un-published geocaches) if it has even a single Trackable dropped in it. Edited: For clarification So obfuscate the coordinates as I suggested if you are really paranoid

Try the Google website shrinker

Because the software is designed by the same people who think that MM/DD/YYYY is a sensible format for dates

Just wondering

Create a cache listing with coordinates of your home (maybe called "Home Sweet Home" or something equally corny), or wherever else you want if you are concerned about someone figuring it out (not that they can with this approach), but don't ever submit it for approval. Log the bug into it et voilà

13 US States/DC 3 Canadian Provinces 27 countries (or 30 if you count England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland separately) (not counting Locationless or Virtuals nominally located where we haven't actually physically found a cache, nor attempts butDNFed) With date of our first find there and a note of how many FTFs we have found in each jurisdiction 2004-01-18 Canada - Ontario (24 FTFs) 2004-04-18 UK - England (1 FTF) 2004-05-08 New Zealand (1 FTF) 2004-08-10 US - Florida 2004-08-18 US - DC 2004-08-18 US - Virginia 2004-08-19 US - New York 2004-08-30 US - Connecticut 2004-11-01 Canada - BC 2004-11-02 US - Washington 2004-11-13 Belgium 2005-01-10 US - North Carolina 2005-04-24 US - Massachusetts 2005-05-14 US - Nevada 2005-05-16 US - Arizona 2005-05-20 Spain (2 FTFs) 2005-05-25 Portugal (2 FTFs) 2005-08-05 UK - Wales 2005-09-11 Andorra 2005-09-14 France (1 FTF) 2005-09-14 Luxembourg 2005-09-14 Germany 2005-09-14 Netherlands 2005-09-19 US - California 2005-09-21 US - New Jersey 2005-09-27 Canada - Québec 2005-11-05 Japan (1 FTF) 2006-03-21 US - Maryland 2006-05-19 Switzerland 2006-05-20 Austria 2006-05-20 Liechtenstein 2006-05-20 Hungary - note also that one cache found (and physically located) in Hungary is at the Hungary/Romania/Serbia tripoint so these two additional countries were also visited on 2006-05-22 in the course of finding this cache. 2006-05-20 Czech Republic 2006-05-21 Poland 2006-05-21 Slovakia 2006-05-23 Croatia 2006-05-23 Slovenia 2006-06-23 Ireland (1 FTF) 2006-06-23 UK - Northern Ireland 2006-09-14 Denmark 2006-09-14 Sweden (1 FTF) 2006-09-14 Norway 2006-09-15 Finland 2006-09-26 UK - Scotland

This one is in the Netherlands, but you pretty much have to be standing in Belgium to retrieve it

Jeremy said here that the problem was fixed. However, having just installed IE7, I am finding that I am getting cut off images from cache page listings.

There still is a cache there AFAIK - part of a multi - I remembered this spot as soon as I saw the photo since I found it on a recent trip to Washington state. I think this is the spot referred to as "Martin's Bathtub" in A Fractured Fairy Tale

This might be fixed now - there were problems with one ISP in Canada but it is now working there - apparently there was a DNS server down in Chicago - see this thread

I figured it was something like that. Looks like all is OK now. Strange that this didn't affect my access from either my Telus mobile or from Xplorenet or for many people from their work computers.