cheech gang

What would be the point of even having puzzles caches if you could go to the map to locate them? Methinks she is referring to her found puzzles.

Perhaps a requirement for adoption should be that the new owner has found the cache previously. Or, that they visit the cache at the time of adoption to ensure it is there and they can find it. But that is not the case today. Logs by the adopted owner indicate he/she talked to the previous owner and got details, but of course that isn't the same as hiding it. I assume when Groundspeak got the idea to create a video of the attempt to find this unfound 5/5 cache, they didn't take into account that the cache was adopted, or think that this made the cache less legitimate. They failed to take into account that the video may be seen by the forum denizens. Like throwing a steak to a pack of wolves.

Is it remotely possible that what seems "obviously ridiculous" to you may not be ridiculous at all to somebody else. It is remotely possible that other geocachers take a highly punitive and severe approach to dealing with other geocachers, yes. This is another area where reasonable may differ. [AN ASIDE] Although not directly germane to this offshoot of the discussion, I personally would likely take the "bad form" option and log a smiley for a replacement I make with permission. Hasn't happened yet... [/AN ASIDE]

Is it remotely possible that what seems "obviously ridiculous" to you may not be ridiculous at all to somebody else.

Yet Keystone profers that since the replacement was given permission by the owner it does not fit the "definition" of a throwdown. It sounds like Groundspeak does not endorse unrequested replacements, but dispatching a cache replacement team is okay...

There is no evidence that the FTF was by his partner. The two gents on the "replacement" mission were bearded. According to the posted photos of the two different gents on the next day's FTF climb they were without beards. There may or may not be some connection between the four, but that would be speculation.

Just to be clear, the assertion here is that the person who arranges to replace the cache on behalf of the cache owner is never allowed to log the find? Wow. an opinion that it is "bad form" = "never allowed"? I believe there is more than a subtle difference.

Here it is all packed up. As to one of me wearing it, I'll see if the wife can snap one at some point this weekend. In the meantime, here's a hipster type fella wearing one... I like your red cell phone!

I would assume it was a typo, intended to be GC. The OP is trying to figure out how many 6 character GC#s remain. Since 100% of his posts have to do with travel bugs and tracking codes I would venture a guess that is what TC refers to.

I've advocated that several times over the years. But a "needs reviewer attention" suggestion has either been ignored or discounted. I can not understand why, but like everything else here I am sure there is a reason. I think they may worry that work will increase for reviewers if the name changes. I don't like the Needs Archived name either. I preface my NA post with "Needs Attention". I sometimes I say something like "I don't think the cache needs to be archived but it really needs cache owner attention. The centrifuge tube has been missing a lid for 4 months, the log is mushy. 2 NMs in the last 2 months. The cache needs attention." Yes, that is what I do as well.

I've advocated that several times over the years. But a "needs reviewer attention" suggestion has either been ignored or discounted. I can not understand why, but like everything else here I am sure there is a reason.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

I wonder how a survey would fare now that users have had a longer time to get acquainted with it.

That site states it is the actual gravestone, if you want to believe what you read on the interwebs.

Here is the info you want, it contains the exact coordinates of the marker and the stone, which are in front of two residences, clearly in view on google street view. Parking across the street. I see no caches there. The info you want

If you sign a challenge cache's physical log, then you are indeed logging (by definition). But you're only claiming to have found the physical container. By logging an online "Found it," you're claiming to have found the physical container and completed the challenge's requirements.

If the OP were to send out an email to every geocacher reminding them of the need for maintenance without first tidying up their own caches, I think it would be warranted. Some people would not recognize a tongue in the cheek if it licked them. Are you referring to the OP's tongue-in-cheek, or are you saying that Keystone's reply was that? Yes I'm sure that one was, not so sure about the other. Could just be me, I guess. Thanks for taking it so well, Rock Chalk! I know both parties and I know they know each other. I would vote for gentle ribbing but YMMV.

If the OP were to send out an email to every geocacher reminding them of the need for maintenance without first tidying up their own caches, I think it would be warranted. Some people would not recognize a tongue in the cheek if it licked them. Are you referring to the OP's tongue-in-cheek, or are you saying that Keystone's reply was that? Yes

Exactly. And despite the consternation of some folks here, I have a couple "just in case" notes on challenges out there. So the accomplishment associated with the challenge cache has no value if you can't log the cache? I am likely very dense, but I have been unable to ascertain what you are driving at. I was in an area on a cache outing. In that area was a challenge cache that I did not yet qualify for. I had fun locating the quality cache hide. I placed a note and date in the physical log book explaining that I signed the log but did not yet qualify to record a find. I put a place holder/reminder note on the cache page stating the same thing. When I actually meet the requirements for the smiley I will look at the note to remind me of the date that I made the find. I am at a loss regarding your concerns about the "value" of the cache. Please elaborate It just seems weird to me. I just wouldn't spend my caching time finding caches that I might never be able to log, but I don't do those trail things with hundreds of caches so I guess I'll just never get it. I don't do power trails either. Nor do I know what that has to do with the subject.

Exactly. And despite the consternation of some folks here, I have a couple "just in case" notes on challenges out there. So the accomplishment associated with the challenge cache has no value if you can't log the cache? I am likely very dense, but I have been unable to ascertain what you are driving at. I was in an area on a cache outing. In that area was a challenge cache that I did not yet qualify for. I had fun locating the quality cache hide. I placed a note and date in the physical log book explaining that I signed the log but did not yet qualify to record a find. I put a place holder/reminder note on the cache page stating the same thing. When I actually meet the requirements for the smiley I will look at the note to remind me of the date that I made the find. I am at a loss regarding your concerns about the "value" of the cache. Please elaborate

Exactly. And despite the consternation of some folks here, I have a couple "just in case" notes on challenges out there.

If the OP were to send out an email to every geocacher reminding them of the need for maintenance without first tidying up their own caches, I think it would be warranted. Some people would not recognize a tongue in the cheek if it licked them.

I got into geocaching for many of the same reasons and I also don't understand the appeal. But for me to declare power trails as being lame would be the epitome of arrogance. So what. Glad geocaching can be all things to all people. Have at all the power trails that can be (legally) made. I'll ignore them. When I choose to practice my 5% impurity, I'll even run (a shorter) one if its convenient. As arrogant as it may seem, I reserve the right to declare anything lame that I wish.

Log into geocaching.com and let us know what you think. Now you tell us!

is this kewl?