Wintonian

Realy we need an old timer expert here. But yes I think one of things about self policing was about preventing 'destruction' andkeeping it enviomentaly, family friendly and hopefully not upsetting land owners. But like I said we need an old timer here.

I got flood controll, had a look and my post hadn't shown, so I reposted and got doubles??

Canned food would not have been a problem though. Besides, there were no rules to be broken back then. Wasn't that can of beans eventually sold on eBay? The O.C.B is owned and in the hands of Team 360. The Ebay thing may have been more of a joke than anything else. I saw the O.C.B 6 years ago at Saxmans first campout event. Kinda <sniff> brings a <sniff-sniff> tear to my <sniff> eyes. Yes I belive it travels arround But when is it going international? You all know we overe here have a 'special relationship' with the US of A.

Someone correct me if I am wrong. Geocaching.com was set up in 2001 I belive and that guideline would have been drawn up in consultaion with the community in an effort to self police the hobby/ sport - which I would imagim being a lot easier certanly pre 2005 when there wern't so many of us. I knew about geocaching since about 2002/ 2003 and just wish I could have afforded a GPS unit then, I feel like I have missed out on a lot.

What we want then is a PQ system that will allow us to have: Avalibe in winter Not avalibe in winter Both avalibe in winter and not avalibe in winter Not winter tag set Avalibe in winter and not tag set Bot avalibe in winter and no tag set Even if you explain it in non technical terms I feel that may still confuse So how about (and this may confuse even more but should be taken in the context of a compleat PQ page overhall.) 3 options Cache is avalibe in winter Cache is not avalibe in winter I don't mind if the cache is avalibe in winter or not Plus an option for advanced settings allowing you to set: Avalibe in winter Not avalibe in winter Both avalibe in winter and not avalibe in winter No winter tag set Avalibe in winter and no tag set Bot avalible in winter and no tag set Along with ofher options to keep the PQ page simple and user friendly on it's main page with those requireing the extra filtering able to go to the advanced options Do pepole understand what I'm driving at?

Gosh, yes I have watched the vid and just watched it again, if only I could afford the air fare. I am afraid I can't answer your question but I do belive that it was one of the first guidlines created so I asume that would put it at about 2003/ 2004? Would be intresting to know though. Thinking about it I would think more like 2002/ 2003

I have a couple of caches magneticaly behind sign posts, but they are part of a sreies and strictly speaking they are difficult as park and grabs during the day due to the parking restictions. These are part of a series in my home city hopefully leting pepole know about a bit of uncommaly know history, thus hopefully they are a bit more intesting than a normal park and grab, that is pepole are intested in more than their find count. I however travel by public transport and call then cache and dash caches as you can nip of a train/ but/ tram and log them, aslo the tern cache and dash does seem more populare here.

Right! that sort of boils down to the fact that the whole PQ selection procces is complicated, I as a newbee when selecting my first PQ understood that this was a 'AND' function and thought that I could get results for; 'I have found' AND 'have not found' thinking I would get both. As these think work in 'AND', 'OR' and 'NOT' ways that is the obviouse way to put it on the PQ page. As we are talking about attributes, I think therefore we need possibly radio buttons with the options of; 'caches must have this attribute', 'caches must not have this attribute' and 'caches don't need to have this attribute. It seem to me that as well as the options given and the formating of them the title/ discription for those options is just as important so that pepole can understand what they are selecting and that it meets thier needs and to do that you need to think like someone who dosn't know anything about computers apart from turning them on and what type of cheese to feed the mouse.

IMO I think (as much as I rspect him) what Markwell is proposing is quite confusing, it loooks like the proposel is to have a choice to of 2 option to exclude and 2 option 2 include, and if an attribute were to have only a yes setting you could exclude it but it only has a yes option?? I admit that I am realy missing something here and don't quite understand it myself. I also think that the current attribute system would work if pepole would appropreatly set them for instance in a city you don't normaly need to set an attribute for no snakes (at least here anyway) or in a countryside park I wouldn't have thought it neccersey to set an attribute saying that it is kid friendly as these thing are normaly disignd for kids. I also relise that these thing can differ depending on what country you are in and again in the UK you would not need to set an attribute for no snowmobile required.l As far as not being included in the GPX file that would be handy with my Oregon but do most cachers cahe with GPSr's like the Etrax range and carry paper printouts if they wish? But yes it would be nice for them to be included in a GPX file. Just my own thoughts and if I understood Markwell suggestion better I might change them.

As most cachers who set puzzels enjoy setting a challenge for others and thus enjoy it even more when a cacher has solved their puzzle, they are normaly helpfull when someone needs a hint to said puzzle. So in turn I would have thought that a quick email to the cache owner asking if the co-ords you have come up with are correct would elicit a responce along the lines of yes they are correc/ you havn't quite got them right think a little more about this aspect of the puzzle etc.. or at least a yes or know.

First double for a while.

Some pepole would like nanos to have their own individual size like micros and regulars. All the nano's I have seen so far are like these ones. Edit to add: However I think you are right as things stand now nanos should go down as micros as is written in my interpritaion of the guidlines.

The most common TOTT is the very technical pointy stick, well at least it is this side of the pond.

Do you use Hotmail? There has been some history of Hotmail silently(*) blocking e-mails from geocaching.com. silently(*): Meaning, it's deleted and isn't sent to your junk mail box. gmail seems to be the winner here and seems to be genrally recomended.

It is written somewhere and I think it works something like: site:geocachers.hiddinginahedge.org.uk search term Exactly. Or, you can do the same thing using Google's Advanced Search page. Put "forums.Groundspeak.com" in the "Search within a site or domain" box. This isn't exclusive to Google is it? and work with other search engines, I think I have used it in the past with Yahoo, but it should be something I use more often considering how frustrated I get with the search function.

I'm staying away from it at the mo as it looks like 2.99 was a bad release and 3.01 just fixed it so 3.01 should be ok but to be honest 2.99 dosn't realy give me anything I'm intested in like fixing the annoying compass, drift or occasional shut down I get with 2.98. As flattie said lots of info and disscusion here

That does require a little thought when you are trying to point someone to the FAQ, and I do so because not everyone spots it , I have to admit I don't that oftem look at the stickys. But by linking directly to the topic in the FAQ along the lines of: yes you can do that have a look at this topiic in FAQ insted of If you look at the FAQ the answer is there, it's about how you write your post not what is in it.

It is written somewhere and I think it works something like: site:geocachers.hiddinginahedge.org.uk search term

I know you shouldn't clutter up your pages with attributes that arn't needed and I tend to only use 3 -5, but I has struck me as strange that there is space for the extra 2 and have wonderd why this is.

A well hidden cache in a forest of trees is not easily found using Google Earth. Can you get close? I suppose. I don't think I need to detail the difference between finding a lamp post in a parking lot using Google Earth vs. finding a cache in the middle of the woods or some other well hidden urban hide. You guys should be smart enough to figure that out. But the cache might not be on a lamp post unless it states that in the discription.

I’m confused – am I the only one? If the OP could clarify their question then we might be able to help. Then I can enjoy the snacks on offer at the same time.

From the guidelines: The most relevant bit to this thread is " The geocache is presumed to be commercial if the finder is required to go inside a business, interact with employees, and/or purchase a product or service, or if the cache listing has overtones of advertising, marketing, or promotion." therefore having a cache inside a supermarket car park isn't necessarily commercial whereas if the cache is hidden inside the confides of an amusement park that charges an entrance fee or in the reception area of a hotel then that would be against the guidelines.

Here's a list for you: http://geolex.locusprime.net/ TFTC/F - Thanks For The Cahe/Find TN LN SL- Took Nothing Left Nothing Signed Log.

I thought it was BBcode? Isn't BCcode something diffrent? Anyway heres a guide to BBcode: http://www.phpbb.com/community/faq.php?mode=bbcode

OK, you're testing me, right? And doing a very good job of it, indeed! Sorry, but to answer that question in this thread would be totally off-topic. Since buried caches has already been listed in this thread as a "Dead Horse" topic, you can probably guess that it has been discussed before, and that a forum search would probably be a good idea. At the very least, though, starting a new thread on that new topic would be appropriate. Whew!! How'd I do? Nicely done. However you could have also given her a link to my very similar question which was answered by Renegade Knight. Carolyn Use the pointy object test - if you don't need to use one or something simmiler to create a hole then the chances are that it's ok.