Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bigjim4life

  1. So then which would be the one to do? Honestly, they don't have to be at the specific coordinates when they answer the question, but they would need to know a specific detail of something at that spot (so maybe they could research it and then finish the quiz part later).
  2. Hello all, I have a handful of GC hides and have another idea for a mystery hide of some sort. In order to learn about a particular location/item, I want to create an online quiz - where people have to get 'X' number of questions right during the quiz, (one of which can only be solved by getting a detail from an object at the posted coordinates) - when they do, the final cache coordinates are revealed. Two questions, to those of you who are active on here, have you seen other caches using a method like this? If so, where would I go online to create a good, free quiz like this for this purpose?
  3. I emailed Groundspeak - their logs have been deleted and accounts locked.
  4. First of all, yes, I've already read the Help topic about Letterbox Hybrids at https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=127&pgid=822 However, I'm not getting it. If we're going searching for a LH, do we need to have our own custom stamp in order to claim the find? Do we need our own notebook of sorts to use the rubber stamp and log within? I've never searched for regular letterboxes before and haven't really planned to - however, if I see an LH nearby, and I don't currently have those things - am I not able to go claim it? Thanks in advance for your help!
  5. Oh ok - I brought that up as well in my email to them, so maybe they'll look into it. Thank you!
  6. Sorry about that everyone! I had a moment earlier and didn't think when I posted that image - I've edited it and want to apologize to those I may have offended/upset. Regarding the potential "spamming" of caches - there's nothing really that Groundspeak can do about that, right?
  7. So I saw that a couple of caches in my Watchlist were found within minutes of each other, and I got an automatic email notification that a pair of cachers found the caches on my list. I look at the logs and I see "cool" as each one of the logs for both users - and nothing else. Not necessarily an automatic red flag, people can put whatever they want in a log. Out of curiosity, I want to see if these are established geocachers - this way I know "hey, this person found it, maybe I should give it another shot, the cache is actually there", etc etc - or if they're a newbie, this is their first or second find - or if they're just spamming around, causing trouble. I go in and see that these two people, Basic Members have found 15 caches in the last few days - some two days ago, and a whole bunch today (impressive, if they actually are caching). But most of their logs are still one word logs, or stupid stuff. Then I see one log with cursing in it (and suggestive language, I guess). However, it's not for one of my caches, so I can't delete the log. As a bystander - if I see something like this, and it raises potential red flags all over the place - what do I do? I don't necessarily want to ignore it and move on - I feel obligated to say something or do something.
  8. So then that's a "no" to the pill bottles. Alright, I'll recycle them when I get home. Thanks everyone!
  9. I have some pill bottles/containers that I'm thinking about re-using as cache containers - however, I'd like to cover them up in camo tape before I hide them. For those of you with experience hiding these (or experience with camo tape in general), what's the brand/type you use, what's the best type? I'd prefer something you can order on Amazon (even better with Prime) unless it can be found at a local chain (Home Depot/Lowes) or on a geocaching-specific web store. Ready, and....go! (And thanks in advance!)
  10. In my specific instance, I'm looking at a couple of businesses - i.e. a gas station, or a hardware store, etc. - within view of a railroad crossing or railroad tracks. I'd ideally hide it in said building's parking lot or shrubbery/tree (at least 50 feet or whichever the rules are) from the tracks. So I wouldn't have the same familiarity as some of you describe with said owners. Would I just go in and ask for a manager, in this case? Or just quietly hide an LPC or shrubbery micro?
  11. Sure enough, you were right. I printed a copy out at home and everything was perfectly fine. Thanks!
  12. Since the brochure has been brought up - I've tried to print it out - and yet I keep getting what you see attached - any thoughts? Normally I'm pretty good with tech stuff, but this is just weird...
  13. So then what do you say to someone who has never heard of Geocaching? Do you go into some long-winded explanation of it, or do you say something short and sweet to the point (and then go into more detail if they seem interested)?
  14. Let me start off by saying that I have certain issues with social anxiety. I do a lot better with certain things, especially with strangers, in a non-face-to-face environment (i.e. Facebook or the interwebs). Certain people that I know and am friends with, things are a lot easier in person - but if I've never met a person, or I have to interact with a person that I've never met before, then I tend to chicken out, or get incredibly awkward and nervous. Which brings me to my point... If I want to place a cache somewhere and need to get permission from a property owner, (especially a business owner) - if that business owner is on Facebook/the web and has an email address - do you think the chances are equal that they'd grant permission to have a cache hidden there, if the request comes in via email vs in person? Or is it preferred to do it in person every time? Secondly, regardless of whether it's via email/Facebook or in person - what do CO's and potential CO's say, that have the best results both explaining what geocaching is and how/why you want to hide a cache at that particular location? I sent a pair of really long emails to a pair of places, and got one back as denied (still waiting to hear from the other place) - and I'm not sure if I want to continue that route, or if I should suck it up, deal with my demons, and try to do it in person? Help here with both items is tremendously appreciated!!
  15. Ok - thank you to everyone that has replied so far. I posted this thread originally late last night, when I was a bit tired and cranky. There are times, I agree, when a pen runs out of ink, or you leave it in the car after a long day of caching - experienced cachers will note this and either somehow find another way to sign the log, or document somehow that they found it. I've had plenty of occasions where I've said that I couldn't sign the log due to it being absolutely knackered and mostly destroyed. In that case, take a photo of the log, and send it privately to the CO in addition to marking it as "found" - this way the CO knows that you did indeed find the log, but physically could not sign the cache. But I've also seen so many times when a person has 4 finds, 9 finds, etc. that have said they didn't have a pen, but signed the log. I've also seen a few logs where someone with 1200+ finds say that they found the log, but their pen broke, etc. As a future CO, is there a solid line that says "ok, you're new, I'll give you a break", or is it (like so many things with geocaching) up for interpretation and leniency?
  16. Does this irk me as much as it does other people? "I didn't have a pen"... then why are you out geocaching? If a requirement of finding a physical cache (not an Earthcache, Webcam, or Virtual) is that you have to sign the log - should you always try to have a writing utensil with you? Is it just me, or is that incredibly annoying, that people will go out, without a pen/pencil/marker/crayon/calligrapher and expect to get credit just by saying that you "found it, but didn't have a pen, so couldn't sign it"? Sorry, I needed to rant for a moment.
  17. Wait - for a relative newbie - what is a "monkey" cache? I don't quite get it...
  18. And that's what I've done. But if I notice, "hey, look", for the last six months, there are two NM posts, and almost every one of the "Find" logs indicate that the cache is not functioning properly, or the log is unwriteable or practically destroyed, and the CO is either completely inactive or simply not taking care of their own cache, then logging a third NM or whatever won't do a dadgum thing to get the cache fixed. At that point, is it not clear that if the CO wont get involved anymore, it's time to archive it?
  19. Thanks! And so far, out of the three NA's that I've marked, all three have been temporarily disabled by my local Reviewer. Must have done something right...
  20. So let me get this straight. It seems like there's no 100% right way to do this. So we look on our smartphones, see whether or not the CO is active in the world of caching or not. If they are, put a new logsheet in, add a NM, and hope that the CO comes out soon to put a replacement container there so the new logs don't get further destroyed. If the CO is inactive for a very long time, there are past unheeded NM logs, a lot of past logs for months saying that the log is unsignable, needs a new container, etc, then either we replace a destroyed log with a new log - but only if it's a special paper (like Rite in the Rain), otherwise the log will end up eventually getting destroyed again (seems kinda pointless to me) - or we log a NM and wait for nothing to happen (since the CO doesn't do jack diddly anymore) - or we log an NA, after looking at all of the surrounding circumstances that we can and making our best judgment call on it, so a responsible CO can come in and put a new cache in if they want. Or we just do nothing at all. UGH.
  21. And yet you yourself said: "'Needs archive' is the way to report major permanent problems to the reviewer when there is no way to sign the logbook." Plus, replacing the log was not among your initial "bullet points" of things to follow. Half of this seems to be "fix the container where you can" and the other half is "report NM or NA" and let the (potentially) absentee CO worry about it". If I see a CO that is active, doing stuff, I'll post a NM - assuming they'll come fix it. You know what? Maybe I'll just take the easy way out and not give a crap. It's less stressful that way.
  22. These are the kinds of logs I'm looking at with regards to potentially doing "NA" on them. I don't think waiting until they are dry will help much...
  23. I'm not looking to archive caches to take cool spots, if that's what you're saying. I'm not sure that I'm ready to start placing caches in general - and I sure as hell wouldn't NA a cache just to try to take a spot from someone else. I'd be pissed if I was actively involved and someone tried to do that to me. My intentions with all of this is only for good. I want to try to help fix caches and keep the game going for others who may follow me in my caching footsteps - even though I may not be a leader or CO, I hate to see ones that are placed and aren't taken care of properly. I just want to do what's right within reasonable guidelines to try to help out where I can.
  24. Ok - I can see why the answer would be "no" - so pretty much the "archival" way and then re-posting your own cache in that spot would be the way to go.
  • Create New...