RufusClupea

I think what you're saying is that I need to click Create a new Query for each follow-up, but that doesn't seem to follow what's happening. I CAN edit--as long as I wait for the process to complete. Again, waiting seems to work. I'd do some of this experimenting, but right now the sun is shining, and I'd rather get out and find some of these caches...

I'm not quite following you. The items edited are Name, Origin, and Radius (overlapping circles to expand/increase the overall area). I would think those changes would be enough for the system to recognize they are different PQs. If not, then again, I think that's a bug. Of course YMMV. Anyway, as I said above, from now on I'll wait until the process is complete before proceeding to the next PQ. The system doesn't seem to have a problem when I do that, so it's apparently NOT seeing the same PQ.

The latter--fill out the form, schedule it to run, then immediately edit the form for the next PQ That may be (part of) the problem, but in my mind, that's a bug. Once a completed form is submitted, I would think that's it, and I should be able to continue/proceed to the next PQ.

Things have gotten stranger... One of the PQs I ran had one title on the compressed file, but another PQ's titles on the un/de/compressed files within... I can only guess that something strange is happening when I try to do multiples. I guess the solution (for me) is to do one PQ, and wait until the entire process is complete before progressing to the next PQ. It'll take longer, but I can't see any other fix at this time.

Yes, I've been running PQs successfully. This aberration has happened several times. I can't say for sure if it's happened when running just one PQ, but it's happened at least twice when running multiple PQs. Yes, the caches are there in preview mode--when they appear on the Active tab (albeit struck through). Sometimes after submitting, they don't appear at all; they just get lost in the Twilight PQ Zone.

A few times now, I've created PQs, submitted them, and they show up on the Active Pocket Queries tab with a line through them, but nothing on the Pocket Queries Ready for Download tab. I also get emails notifying me they're available for download, but again--nothing there (they don't appear in the Pocket Queries Ready for Download tab, but do show up on the Active Pocket Queries tab with a line through them. This seems to happen if/when I create more than one PQ at a time. I also cannot delete the struck-through queries from the Active tab (yes, I'm checking the boxes). Is the system buggy, or am I doing something incorrectly, or what? TIA PS I also ran one that showed up on the tabs, but I never got an email notice for it (not that it matters, but again, seems to be a bug(?))

I scanned the forum archives for this topic--found mention, but no real discussion (though I could have missed it). Many of us know about this, but for those who may not (and as a reminder to those who do), The Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALB) is threatening the hardwood forests we love (and hide caches in) in the Northeastern US and Southeastern Canada (among others). Their preferred hosts/food include: maple, birch, elm, ash, poplar, horsechestnut, and willow, among others. Please don't make the mistake of assuming that if the maps don't show them in your vicinity that we need not be concerned or vigilant. These buggers have wings; they can fly and spread more quickly than we might imagine. Since the only countermeasure is destroying any infested host, if left unchecked, it could result in widespread wholesale deforestation. What can we--as Geocachers--do? A LOT. As frequenters/enjoyers of the forests--armed with GPSrs/Smartphones & apps--we are (moreso than the average muggle) the First Line of Defense against these destructive invaders. More Pics of ALB (for aid in identification) United States Department of Agriculture APHIS -- Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALB) NYS DEC -- Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALB) Asian Longhorned Beetle: First Line of Defense -- Youtube Video

Please don't put words in my mouth or thoughts/intentions in my head. I see it as competitive because there are so many ways of keeping score (among other defining attributes). So far, I haven't seen a single cache log (the ones that are signed inside the cache--i.e. the ones I'm talking about--not the ones on the cache sheet) that mentions anything about experiences other than a quick "TFTC" or "Great Hide". The largest category--Micros--don't have room for much--if anything--else. Their purpose seems to be one of the ways of keeping (or proving) score. I've seen swag described as souvenirs, items for trade, and rewards for finding a cache. At least 2 of those qualify as things to accumulate (a way of keeping score,and one of the 3 objectives of games, i.e. race, accumulation, position).

That's what I've been saying right along, because that's what it is--a competitive game--by every definition I'm familiar with. Maybe those who insist it's not are just looking to keep stirring the pot... Perhaps we should agree to disagree.

Wasn't aware I had/was spoze ta log as attending the event. OK

If I saw that particular hint--depending on my knowledge of/experience with that particular CO--I might search the stump first (stumps are actually pretty limited/narrowed down areas to search, IME) and then if unsuccessful, I'd look around to see what else the hint might be hinting at. I think I would understand SicilianCyclops' gripe point if he would give an example.

Wow. I was tempted to say there is a possibility that monkeys... but I won't. If it's non-competitive, then why are there so many ways of keeping score, why are there logs, why is there swag, why are so many people making it about numbers, etc? And perhaps most importantly, what's wrong/the problem with it being competitive? Is that somehow threatening?

I don't doubt nor disagree with that. I think we may be in violent agreement.

That may be the best argument I've seen/heard for limiting the number of caches one may hide. In my few short weeks GC, I've seen several discussions about prohibiting people from hiding caches until they've found x (or xx or xxx) # of caches. I haven't seen any discussions about limiting the # of hides (though that could be due to my noobishness... noobisity? <shrug>) though seeing some of these astronomical #s makes me wonder... To anyone who says they can reasonably maintain several hundred caches... Well... I wouldn't call them a liar, but I might quote a line from The Ghost and the Darkness, "On that I choose to remain dubious."

Better to have one and not need it than to need one and not have it? Hey...ya never know... y'know? Or maybe they're just spreading the love... Oh, you are sooo wrong! Perversion is an equal opportunity delinquency.

I think you may have just lost your own argument to yourself. I'M not playing a zero-sum game at the moment. As I've said before, I got into this (originally) primarily for the exercise (which I badly need) because I loathe mall walking. After looking into it a bit more, I've discovered other aspects that also appeal to me. Some could be considered competitive; others not. Inherent in almost any pursuit I undertake more than once or twice is competing with myself. I don't see competition as a bad thing/dirty word; I am a lifelong consummate gamer (consummate when I'm feeling good enough).

What you are describing are "zero-sum" competitions/games, Not all competitions are zero sum; some/many are "non-zero-sum" competitions, nevertheless it is still competition. Prisoner's Dilemma is one example. Geocaching can be either/both, depending on players' objectives and other factors. I'll reiterate; there is nothing wrong with competition, or that geocaching is competitive. Competition is not a dirty word.

I don't either. That doesn't mean it isn't designed that way--or doesn't function that way--for the vast majority.

When I ran my first PQ I thought the same thing--that I'd be busy for months, but after pursuing a few, and then perusing the list, I came to the same conclusion. So I ran a second PQ, exactly the same as the first, except that I filtered out "Micro" size caches. I was amazed at the result, so I ran a few more test samples. Of the samples I ran, ~45% were "Micro"s--caches ostensibly geared toward boosting the numbers of cachers and COs. Well, I've been considering myself a relic for a couple years now, but I'm still a noob by my reckoning. I decided when I ran that second PQ that I would no longer (with very few exceptions) bother at all with micros, which leaves me with a bit of a quandry. The kinds of caches I'd like to be going after are the kind I can no longer safely pursue. I've gotten myself into trouble a few times now going after caches rated T=1.5 that were actually T=2.5 or even higher. But it seems the ones I can safely hunt are of that carpy pill bottle/film can type. I couldn't care less about the numbers; I got into this for the exercise and mental stimulation.

I respectfully disagree. Everything about geocaching is about competition; if it weren't there wouldn't be logs to sign, whether to journalize (I didn't think it was a word either, but I looked it up, and apparently it is) the adventure or just to declare/prove "Kilroy was There". It's referred to almost universally as a "game", which by definition is a competition. There's nothing wrong with that (competition). Competition is in our DNA; games are simulations of the struggle to survive. And every new aspect to the game has been about competition--trackables, tours, promotions (e.g.Mary Hyde), not to mention the ubiquitous challenges.

Corrosion, damage, unsightliness, what-have-you... Is esthetics more a/esthetically pleasing than aesthetics?

"Those who'll say it's not"

Passed 2 TBs along to another cacher at an event to move them along their objectives (TBs wanted to go west; she was going west). Do I need to log those? If so, how, and how to get them off my inventory?

I've got admittedly mixed feelings. The first few I found were LPCs, but the last one contained a hornets nest. No activity or I would have forgone it; but there wasn't, so I didn't (forgo it). Got stung, tripped over a curb, lost 6 sq. in. of skin (right down to meat) off my elbow, and sprained my wrist. I think I'm done with LPCs.

As a new geocacher, I find little integrity in it now. I can answer, "Why log a geocache on a different day than you found it?" Some days I get home so tired I fall asleep before I can log a find. There have also been times I've simply forgotten about a find until I come across something that reminds me, "Oh yeah, I forgot about that one," which reminds me... I went to my first event last night. I brought along a couple of TBs to pass along (get rid of). Several people wanted me to let them see the TBs just so they could copy down the #s and record themselves as having found them (or whatever--I'm new, remember?) I declined, thinking about something I'd recently read about that practice. I finally found someone who was traveling in the right direction to advance these TBs along their goals, and I gave them to her. She immediately threw them down on the table so her "friends" could log them. Some will disagree, but that's not the way I understood these things to work. Another reason I want nothing more to do with TBs... ever. There happened to be a cache very close to this event. I couldn't find it (later to find out from folks who'd previously found it that it really was missing). I was talking to another cacher there who told me, "Go ahead and log it; if it's gone, who's gonna know?" Answer: I'D know. Whether you call it--or blame it on--ethics, "goofiness", entitlement, human nature, situational ethics, or laissez faire gameplay doesn't matter; you'll always find those who'll say it's cheating, those who'll say it's not, and those who'll fall back on "it's just a game."