GRANPA ALEX

It means I am qualified to walk on water (on very cold days) and speak in platitudes of meaningless jibberish that tend to elevate my status in the community while I dictate policy to others and lord it over anyone who has fewer smilies than I do . . . or not! Okay, this is probably a NOT situation - but it does mean that I did not ignore the cache & cache owner and got it off my nearest the better way . . . finding it and signing the log to encourage the hider to hide more which is a good thing. It's always more about the other guy than it is about me.

The local gang of cachers here in my area just threw a party and awarded Golden Ammo Cans full of geo-goodies for some cachers who reached a pretty substantial benchmark in number of caches found . . . it was a good time and an excuse to meet/greet and share some brews. Took a lot of work to put such a thing together and some personal expense, too. A very nice gesture that encourages all of us to play more, play well and care for others . . . it's one of the reasons the area is so robust in activity & still growing.

Turn it into a micro . . . these never get muggled!

Maybe it would help if multi-caches rated multi SMILEYS, one for each stage. It is a new find for each stage, right? Some stages require miles of driving, new puzzle-solving and myriad other hoops to jump through . . . they should have more smiley-value . . . methinks! We all want to complete the things that we begin. With shorter attention spans and limited time available for fun . . . we may resort to terminal caches (one stoppers) as the best use of our time. Lately, the reviewers are leading us toward multi caches, as opposed to several single stage ones in a close area . . . perhaps to limit saturation . . . why not give more smileys to bring us on-board to this idea?

Personally, my count attainment is a measure of success I have acheived in meeting MY targets and they have nothing to do with anyone else. THAT is exactly the way I feel about everyone else's count - it is a measure of the time they have to play, the priorities they set in their lives and goals they set - nothing to do with me. I once thought that experience even equated to greater ease in finding a cache BUT I became dismayed . . . newbies finding caches with ease on which experienced cachers had DNF logs AND going out with high-number guys who struggle the same as I do with finds. It is simply, for the most part, one cache a time for everyone and we are all equal, except for time in the game and time to spend in the game. That is my view & I am sticking to it!

These have been done before and are popular . . go for it. I have one that has children's books for exchange that is popular.

You guys are very creative . . . I really envy such talent - congrats! I only make caching sticks (pokers) from old broken golf clubs. They are very strong and light. With a small fixture on the end to replace the missing head - it serves to move/drag debris, drag caches out of suspicious holes AND works as a walking stick.

Old pencils, too short for writing comfortably, but the eraser end can be removed, drilled out and the eraser replaced. Can use old ball point pens (already hollow). Place micro logs inside hollowed area. Then, toss them anywhere where such would not be out-of-place AND ignored (around a phone booth, under a bench on a college campus etc) Of course, the best containers come from the area of the hide . . . for instance, drill out a pine cone found at the hide area, stick in a bison tube and throw it in with other cones of the same type - evil, but provides a memorable cache experience and exhilerating find. Remember, a small hand-operated drill is your friend when it comes to creating containers with ease and an evil glint in you eye. You will become so popular!

Of couse, we can edit our logs when we find a special cache and want to accomodate the owner for his zeal, effort and expertise . . . but, many caches can be logged as finds with a generic post. When we have, say a hundred finds to post, it would be great to have them downloaded into a file from our GPSr and logged from there in a keystroke, automatically. Is this already being done & I don't know about it (probable). . . please advise, if so. If not, can we develop a macro that does this heavy lifting for us?

I am so sorry to hear of your loss & I feel the entire gc community joins in feeling the pain of a family member & friend being lost. I, too, have spent many happy times in the Sierras from the time I lived in Sacramento & Riverside - I know the beauty and awe of the mountains, the lakes, redwoods, incense cedar, ponderosa pine. It is a wonderful example of the greatness that proves the existance of a Creator . . . the same one that holds your brother in his heart, as a father holds a child that is crying. He is there for the survivors, as well - call upon Him.

Thanks Clyde for the information . . . I am sharing it with my caching buddies who are more literate than I & I will try it too. What a time savings it will be. We downloaded all of our finds into a new GSAK file from our 60CS at the end of each day, so we have a clean file to addres that contains ONLY our finds. Great response, love your software . . . really super and compatible with other needs (GPS, mapping, PPC). Granpa Alex

Ran over 200 caches this weekend, of the 450 loaded into my GPS via GSAK. Now I want to use GSAK to log the 200+ finds on the gc.com site, with generic logs . . . can it be done as a bulk upload from a GSAK file? Please point me to the data source to answer this query . . . one-at-a-time will take longer than the finding did in the field.

I want to load all my finds from the 3-day weekend in GSAK and log them all at once with a generic log. Is there a thread or advise someonhe can offer

Okay, I can honor your traditional holiday thoughts, that is reasonable. I will post no more and wish you well with your celebration meal. One of the three caches was listed at an alternative site AFTER I removed it from the waiting to be published list - the reviewer had provided unreasonable conditions for approval, as mentioned in my OP - I simply could not find the people needed or get the written approval. I waited, hopefully, that things would change to a more favorable outcome. Then, I went to the caches and physically removed them, except one. I had put a lot of time, effort & expense into the caches - I wanted to save one. I felt that this was reasonable. The truth is that any cache placed on any listing site will reflect on us at gc.com, as we are the premier & best site offering caching . . . with good reason. Enjoy your meal, I wish you health & happiness!

Have found that the magnets from old computer hard drives are magnificent for caches . . . a 1 inch square piece will make you need a crow bar to remove an Altoids tin from a metal hide (almost) . . . AND, they can be free at a computer repair shop - just ask & be charming. Break them into smaller pieces,without striking them, & you won't lose the super power they hold.

Have seen these used, have found them full of moisture. The most success was when the cache page insisted that they be placed 'upright' everything inside inside was in plastic sealable freezer bags - this has been successful.

Yes, I have seen & ardently read this and countless forum entries on the subject, as I am genuinely interested in the preservation of the game in SC. AND, I have written the politicians there coupled with a letter of support to the local gc people who asked for this written support. It is all that I can do. But I will not be mean or unjust to another cacher. This being said, it still does not make us a political organization, just citizens. It also does not give cause for us to treat each other in an ill or unfair manner . . . what is appropriate for any other state for approving/publishing caches must apply in SC as well. Demanding more than is asked in another place is treating a cacher poorly and being unjust . . . besides, it does not change the political situation, politicians know not that we are being mean to one another and do not care. We simply hurt ourselves.

Not wanting to start a big debate or generate animosity on the subject, but I just pulled three caches off the waiting to be published list in SC. The old reviewer (we have nice new one now) refused to approve the caches, though they met gc.com guidelines, as applied to other caches I have placed and those placed by others. No anger at the friendly reviewer who must have felt it was a proper treatment of caches & cachers (I disagree, strongly, but was not asked) No photograph or hide description or written landowner permission has been required to be sent to the reviewer in ANY case I have seen. But, these were demanded for my new caches. I have not had problem caches, so as to be scrutinized to this degree . . . my caches are well-visited, recieved and enjoyed. Groundspeak & gc.com (if different entities) are not political organizations, PACs or lobbiest nor can they impact political change . . . we just should NOT get involved in any political matters or run scared by changing our rules/guidelines to serve some loud irreverent politician's current temporary whim. I am sure that others have differing thoughts and can support some of them with high-sounding arguments . . . but, we are wrong to let changing political or other circumstances alter how we treat each other.

I simply can not believe that I am saying THIS . . . but I absolutely agree with CR on almost every point he has made, as well as many others who share the idea that there ARE simple rules you must tend to in order to claim a find. There are caches that are dependent upon timing of the tides to reach them on the coast. In NC it is timing based upon droughts to reach islands in several of the lakes . . . you can SEE the hides sometimes, but you must sign the log to claim it. (SO SIMPLE) As for spiders & snakes, most of us carry a geo-stick or cane and there are sticks lying in forest litter around us to use . . . probe the critters & they run, no bites or allergies! (SO SIMPLE) Yes, CR is right (ouch), include a small flash light & mirror in your belly pack/geokit to SEE into questionable areas, pull the cache out with your geostick . . . sign the log! Like the one in Park Circle in Charleston SC, a scary hole, that one! We need a new topic . . . this one is really well done. Maybe we can discuss micros some more ????

Aw shucks . . . another opinion that will sound a lot like others, with simplicity. One must sign the log (or a log) at the cache site to claim the find, it is just so simple. If you find a wet one, have some dry ones in your pocket (& a baggie) so that you can sign it and make it possible for those who follow you to sign easier & to help the cache owner. I have had to move black widow (et al) spiders, copperhead and rattler snakes. I have had to crawl up hills of loose rocks, crossed icy streams barefooted, crawled on knees under briars & through sewer pipes . . . what ever it takes - you sign the log to claim the cache. The only exception I have had is when I am standing beside a buddy that I cache with as he signs fro both of us . . . I found it, I saw it, I touched it.

It look as if the subject has been pretty much broght to a reasonable conclusion with which we all agree . . . may I add: The cache owner would have better addressed his concern by emailing the finder and asking for a log modification, as opposed to deleting the log & find. He might even have suggested why he was offended and suggested acceptable text, IF he was trying to be reasonable himself. It seems to boil down to a little bitterness or over-sensitivity or mild arrogance on the part of the owner that probably had nothing to do with the finder or his log. So, we move on to the next cache, right?

Somehow, it seems to me that the original cache owner still OWNS the cache, no matter how active they might be. I would contact the cache owner asking for the cache and then do as you suggested, referencing the original data. Then, do what is needed to adopt it and make it your own . . . seems the way to go to me.

Not complaining but I understand the word "MUST" as not being subject to revision, it sounds more like a hard & fast rule, rather than a flexible guideline. Perhaps the word 'should' would be more applicable . . . no matter, I am okay with it as a rule - there are plenty of places to hide caches, even if I have had to pass up some choice ones. As many have said, a nearby owner will probably be very willing to move a micro in favor of a larger cache, right? I certainly would, if someone who was kind to me and asked nicely - it simply makes sense to please the larger number of seekers.

There was a time, not too long ago, when I provided a very simular post about puzzles and was warmed by high flames for asking for help. I was told that the cache was owned by someone who had the right to offer help, if they wanted too, or not. As it was, the owner said he would not help, as he said "That's why it is called a puzzle". This was fine, I never logged a find on it, though I spent several hours going through stages and got down to a final impossible cipher . . . that is how he plays, so I avoid his puzzle caches (his others are great fun). It just seems to me that puzzles are NOT really geocaching . . . I see gc as a game of using coords, hints and some skills to hunt & find caches, not solving ciphers & puzzles - but, that's me - you may well feel differently & that's okay! Maybe they should be placed over on Waypoint.com, too with the other alternative ideas for caches . . . what do you think?

Just a query . . . how did we come up with the arbitrary distance of 1/10 miles (528') for cache density control? It highly unlikely that anyone's coords or search area would require such an arbitrary distance, am I right? Is it arbitrarily implemented, subject to reasonable exclusion if circumstances warrant a change . . . it certainly should be to better serve the caching community. You see, if it IS arbitrary, it can be treated in an arbitrary manner, as a guideline rahter than a hard & fast rule.