Jump to content

Kelsborrow Wayfinders

+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Kelsborrow Wayfinders

  1. Oh good. Can I moan about people who only write on one sign of a logbook page? I went out to replace a logbook on Friday having been told it was full only to find numerous blank sheets where pages had been skipped. It's even worse when people write TFTC TNLN in big letters on one side of the page. I'd like to promote more economical use of logbook pages. :ph34r:

  2. And yes it IS done with irony!!!


    Could someone explain the difference between an ironic cache and a non-ironic cache? It strikes me it's still a cache by a bus shelter.


    Perhaps there should be a Bus Stop Bewilderment Ironic Series and Bus Stop Bewilderment Non-Ironic Series.



  3. Limiting the number of caches a team sets would be wrong!

    One of our local cachers has over 100 to his name and they are extremely well maintained in great locations and he only uses micros as a last resort in a location that is interesting in itself. If anyone posts a comment about the condition of any of them he will be out checking it within days!


    Another local cacher has fewer than ten and (despite still logging on to GC regularly) never replies to DNFs or maintenance requests.




    Being honest in logs about a cache being poor would only work if you never set any yourself as it just attracts retaliatory logs... :laughing:



    Edit: typo


    I know exactly what you are saying because I know similar cachers and it's difficult to find fault with their maintenance schedule or hides. I just feel that although it's extreme it might be beneficial to geocaching in the long run. How about a compromise cut off date whereby people with over 20 caches hidden can't hide any more but can keep their current ones :D (a bit like the current ruling on virtuals) In addition, to get over the newbie issues, you are not allowed to hide caches until you have 50 finds.


    It's all hypothetical anyway.

  4. Personally I have always thought that there should be a limit to the number of caches placed. Say about 20 for each caching team. I know it's a low number and it would affect many of the experienced cachers, especially those that thrive on placing them, but it might encourage people to think more carefully about the caches they place. By doing this people would be forced to archive there less popular or older caches if they wanted to place any more and hopefully it would encourage a higher quality. In addition it wouldn't prevent new cachers from hiding caches and areas would come back into circulation for new caches. 20 would be an easier number to maintain so there would be less wet logbooks as people would be more prepared to maintain them. It would also slow down the growth of mass power trails. I know there would be ways around it (second accounts etc) but people will always find loopholes. Anyway I think it's a good idea even if no-one else does.

  5. I wonder if people's enthusiasm wanes when they have reached a target that they have been chasing for some time. It would be interesting to know if people slow down or stop when they have reached 100, 1000 etc. Are there a significant number of cachers stuck in the 100-110 range and 1000-1100 range? Perhaps your best bet would be to just do one or two here and there like alma suggested and take it easy. Mind you the weather doesn't help.

  6. We both acknowledge that the KWP points system won't work for many people but it certainly revitalised my caching last year. It actually worked even better than we hoped and has given us plenty of discussion points over the last 12 months. Getting more than 20 KWP points for a cache is always an achievment and I don't think Paul would have been mad enough to drive from coast to coast in one day if it hadn't been for the thought of setting a best KWP points total for a single cache.


    It came about because in the second half of 2006 I was becoming disillusioned by the standard and type of caches being placed and realised I needed to change my general approach to caching hence the points system. It's often been said on this forum that "everyone caches by their own rules" so we thought it would be a good idea to form our own :huh: and means we have a much better way of comparing how we are getting on from month to month.


    Paul only gets more DNF points than me because he does so many Team Marzipan caches. :)

  7. Incidentally my reading of it gave the link to www.geocaching.co.uk and I was redirected to the correct groundpeak address and not geocacheuk. wink.gif


    I noticed just after I had submitted the article that I had put www.geocaching.co.uk instead of www.geocaching.com but when I checked the link it took me to the main site anyway so I didn't think it was worthwhile changing it. Thanks everyone for the kind comments.

  8. We've done a number of long distance walks including the South Downs Way although it took us 9 days to do the full route from Winchester to Eastbourne. I notice your walk finishes at Brighton so I don't know how much it follows the route. My advice for what it's worth is 1) Don't under-estimate the challenge 2) Defintely wear walking boots 3) Take a pole - you will be grateful for it if you have to walk from Birling Gap to Eastbourne and it will give you something to twirl on the flat bits :anicute:

  • Create New...