Neath Worthies

Thank you Deceangi for providing the definition I was asking for. In the absence of any explicit ban, the cache placer has the responsibility for giving him/herself permission. Nice.

AFAIK all these right of access, right of way etc. issues allow you to BE somewhere. They do not allow you to leave something behind. Mention has been made of the need to demonstrate "ADEQUATE" permission before the Reviewers will consider publishing a new cache. To my mind this sounds like a cop out allowing them to make a personal decision to ignore the permission issue when it suits them. I'd like to see where "Adequate" is defined so that we all know what we should and shouldn't be doing. I assume GC worded it this way to allow for differing laws in different countries when they were developing the business into a worldwide model. We need to know what Adequate means in a UK context so perhaps the UK review team will let us know the official definition they all work to.

Unlike many hobbies, ours relies on us leaving a physical item on someon else's propery. Like it or not EVERYWHERE in this country belongs to someone (or some organisation). As Deci says when Geocaching was in its infancy we could get away with leaving stuff lying around and no one knew nor cared. However nowadays we are past the "blind eye" phase and I would argue that reviewers should now require absolute proof that landowner permission has been obtained before publishing ANY cache.

...and all those you have listed above did so in such a publicly humiliating manner did they? They pointed out the error at the time it was made and that was often in "public". In this case a mistake was made in a forum posting and the person who made the correction did so in the same place. I accept that the person pointing out the error did so in a way which was not the most tactful but at the end of the day we are all adults here and ought to be able to take a bit of gentle "ribbing" from time to time (just as I did from Marty Bartfast ) I guess at the end of the day we will have to disagree - you are happy for errors to go unchallenged, I prefer to try and put them right. I trust we can both be happy with our respective approaches.

Sadly this post is symptomatic of the decline in standards over the past years, and is a prime example of the lazy sloppy attitude of posters who can't even be bothered to read their ramblings before hitting the send button. Maybe you'll be grateful for my correcting your posting, or you may just think I'm being an boring pedant. Yes I am grateful and no I don't think you are a boring pedant. By making the comments I did I fully accept the consequences of my error (i.e. public ridicule). It doesn't change the thrust of my argument that errors ought to be pointed out so that hopefully they do not become the norm. Thank you and sorry.

Sadly that attitude is symptomatic of the decline in standards over the past years. We all make mistakes, I certainly do, but I have always been receptive to having such mistakes pointed out to me. Teachers used to do it whe I was at school and since then empoyers, colleagues and friends have continued the process. I have never resorted to calling them "Pedants" and I think you should think before doing so as well. Just because the meaning of something can be deduced doesn't mean that no correction is needed. A free for all in spelling can certainly lead to misunderstandings so correct spelling should be encouraged. I applaud those who care enough to try and help others by pointing out their errors.

It's not a wind up, and stop calling us Shirley! Next time you want to take the "proverbial" out of someone for not knowing how to spell a word, please consider reconsidering. You are not perfect, of that I am 100% sure.... and I don't even know you! If someone is helpful enough to point out a couple of errors who are you to criticise them? If one's errors are ignored how is one expected to learn? We learn by making mistakes and then having them corrected. I'm sure the "Lost One" was only trying to help. To answer the original question, yes it is allowed.

Those damned foreigners, they'll be wanting visitors to speak their language next. Sigh! You really can't make this stuff up sometimes.

Nicely put Nosfera. None of us are perfect (certainly not me!) but a bit of effort goes a long way in my book. Peace and Perfect Punctuation!

Welcome Antheia... Good luck in your new "job". Just a thought for the future, would it be a nice idea if Groundspeak made an official announcement when they enlist a new volunteer for an area rather than relying on someone spotting a new name?

Geocaching in the UK that is ! I was wondering who is the UK's "oldest" active geocacher, that is who has been active in the game longest. Also, if they happen to be a forum user as well it would be interesting to get their thoughts on how the sport has changed in the years they've been playing.

An interesting thread to which I would just add a thought or two. I appreciate correct spelling and reasonable grammar but I do understand that some people may have a medical/psychological condition which causes them varying degrees of difficulty when trying to construct a sentence. However to try to defend the majority of cases of sloppy writing by suggesting that the writer may be dyslexic is missing the point. Yes, there are cachers who suffer from dyslexia but I suggest the majority of "poorly written" cache pages are the result of plain old lack of education. Whether this is the fault of teachers, parents or individuals is debatable but it is a fact. Let's not excuse sloppiness in the majority because of a genuine excuse in a minority. (Any spelling or grammatical errors contained in the above message are down to my own sloppiness for which I apologise.)

I would have thought that being able to discuss ways of enhancing the geocaching experience, to the extent of discussing different hardware and software solutions, would be welcomed by Geocaching.com's customers. After all I would have guessed that the overwhelming majority of people involved in such discussions would be interested in using these solutions to use data obtained through GC. Having to use another external forum has the prerequisite that you already know about the other application. Discussing it here helps other geocachers become aware of things that may be of use to them. I know such discussions regularly have taken place in another GC forum I subscribe to without any problems. If this is a new forum guideline (if it is, could we have a link?) will these discussions also be banned now?

So a "proper" box gets replaced by a nano. Sigh!! How about the alternative approach and keep it as a multi with the nano as it is but move the final box to somewhere more appropriate?

I agree wholeheartedly with Forester. In any case, Geocaching is essentially an adult game but which is also suitable for children under adult supervision. So let's get away from this perceived need to provide the little darlings with lots of free toys at every cache and let's teach them about the non material pleasures of life.

I am led to believe that Trimble is available for the 5800, I am further led to believe that it's free .........Smurf (formerly LWB3) Yes it works but it now costs - so I've stopped using it. Viewranger works a treat though. Google maps works well too and that is free (although you'll need a data plan)

No, this it the weekly "lite" version with added deliberate grammatical "interest". I guess the OP is missing his fix of forum angst. You just need to search a bit of forum history to see what I mean.

I've never seen such a cache over here in the UK but can I assume these fake electrical boxes are mounted on existing electricity poles or the suchlike? If so I'm surprised the owner of the pole has given their permission for the cache placer to use their equipment. Surely if a reviewer suspects a cache doesn't have permission shouldn't they confirm it with the cache placer before publishing?

Thanks for the suggestions. I've now settled on using GSAK to create HTML output and ftp'ing it to the iPod using FileAid which also reads the files. Works OK although not as neat as cachemate etc. although I suppose something might come along in the future.

So I've got a new iPod Touch (3G) and I've been looking for a geocaching app that can read GPX files. I know about the "official" GC iPhone app and assume that it works with an iPod and have seen "GeoSphere" which looks good. Before shelling out I wondered if anybody has any experience with either of those apps or knows of any others. Also, does anyone know of a way of linking a bluetooth GPS unit with the iPod?

Multiple home coordinates would also be useful when wanting to PLACE caches near two separate home locations.

Simply? The OP appears to be from Germany so how does he send a cheque in American currency? Does Groundspeak accept Euros?

But none of those are commercial businesses. All of them are driven by people whose motive is "doing the right thing". Very laudable, indeed I've been involved with two of them myself, but making money is not their prime motive. Groundspeak is a business.

From what Deci describes I think the load on our local volunteers is beyong being reasonable. I suspect it's probably similar in other parts of the world where caching is popular so I question the whole business model under which Groundspeak operates. This is a commercial company, taking paid subscriptions, advertising, selling branded goods and agreeing sponsorship deals. It has a professional executive and several full time, paid employees. All quite proper things for any commercial company. However it relies totally for its main product (cache listings) on the goodwill of unpaid volunteers. It has a company ethos which it expects all volunteer reviewers to follow wherever they happen to be in the world but no real way of enforcing it except by expecting the volunteers to do as they are told. We know what happens when they don't! I would maintain that this model is fine for a small group of enthusiasts and a start up company but Geocaching.com/Groundspeak has gone way beyond that now. I suggest that if reviewers are carrying such a load as Deci describes then they ought to do the job full time and get paid a proper salary. That would also have the benefit to Groundspeak on them being able to insist that the company's guidelines are adhered to as a condition of employment. In case anyone isn't clear, I am NOT criticising our volunteer reviewers, who do a sterling job, rather I'm questioning the way they are expected to operate. The downside - well it would cost money which would have to be found from its customers i.e. us. Up to now we have largely enjoyed a free ride but this cannot continue. The time is rapidly approaching when we are going to have to pay to use the services of Groundspeak. There will be those who are not willing to pay so I guess they will migrate to other, volunteer based, listing sites or will give up. Sad but a fact of life.

My own personal preferences would be: Techie Signing Bikers Given the problems with ALR's and Virtuals on GC these days, why not do the radical thing and list them elsewhere, such as Opencaching UK? You could construct your caches in the way that you want to then.