Deepdiggingmole

Ah Sorted I don't ever recall changing that - particularly as the other set of stats showed the same thing but had them all thanks however, all sorted now

We noticed an anomaly in the maps of caches found in the profile stats sections From the Statistics link on the main page (Quick View - LHS) and then click on the maps tab we are getting all relevant maps (caches found in World, Europe, Asia and Oceania) However when we click on the 'view my profile' box in the 'Stat bar' (RHS) and then the statistics tab, then on the maps tab we only get caches found in Europe and Asia, so the worldwide and Oceania maps are missing This is happening on both the old and newer versions of this stats bit Any ideas why ? Thanks

Sorry just seen this - back from holiday now No I wasn't informed - I had to do a bit of digging to find out what it was about too - I needed to come out of it as it didn't do functions I needed prior to going on holiday - to be told if you come out of it you can't go back was a little rude I thought too - I'd have been happy to test it but as it didn't do what I wanted I had to pull out

Just noted I seem to have been used to test a new version - it didn't do what I need to do and so have opted out

Seems the filtering is now not as good as before An example Show only my solved coordinates - now only has two options - on or off which means you get the full list or only those with solved co-ords before I could list just those that didn't have solved co-ords - this is the selection I want but can no longer pull up it seems - or am I missing something

just found the filter button !!!!

What has happened to the search function and in particular filtering - yesterday I was working through a particular filtered list of caches in NZ ready for a trip and today I cannot complete it due to the search page going to a map and no filters

Thanks - that answers the question perfectly

Hi A quick question - when did the ruling get made regarding the disallowing of holding a geocaching event at the same location as a pre-arranged, organised event Such as a meeting up for a caching event at the same location/time as a village summer fayre with the intent to get involved in the fayre activities This is not a question regarding the ruling as I do not disagree with it - it is simply a question about when the ruling was made. Thanks

OK the link to challenge caches was a bit spurious - my main reason for the OP was to query whether caches can be adopted without the original CO Yes some old caches are propped up and I wont do anything to rock the boat with those - though I do agree that if the CO is not longer active then surely consideration should be made to rethinking their existence - for me an old cache with an active CO is worth much more than one without Thanks to all for responses - my query has been answered

Not a desired outcome for a cache as old as this that many would want kept alive

Yea - control freakery - bit strong that - thanks (not) However I do take your point regarding how to approach this. My main point was whether a cache could be adopted when the CO was no longer avaialble

and then throw into disarray all the challenge caches that these caches could potentially link to

No - it doesn't frighten me, but if the concept of ownerless caches is one that is allowable then the whole principle of log online only if you have signed the proper log, becomes pointless - however to get a cache published now you have to have a maintenance regime - CO maintenance isnt just about replacing the piece of paper every so often

I am aware that in order to adopt a cache the original CO is required to be 'around' to get the process started as it is they who click on to the adopt section of the site. However if there is a really old cache (2001 for example) where the CO has not been active for many years (but the cache seems to be maintained by locals). Can this adoption process be done without the 'presence' of the old CO who is probably not aware that it is still active and probably doesn't care either but at the same time uncontactable due to not being involved for so long. The reason for the question is that - it is acknowledged that these old caches are desirable and all cachers would like them to be preserved and continue - however without an active CO the misuse of the system is such that many could log finds on these even if they haven't been anywhere near the cache and no one can do anything about it - seems to be totally against the principle of CO maintenance. Only the CO can delete the log, though others could question spurious loggers they can't do much more than that So in order to maintain integrity for these iconic ancients surely an agreed adoption protocol could be put in place for the special occasions such as this (all other adoptions to be done with the agreement of old CO)

I have searched the forum for this topic - but didn't seem to find an answer I understand that in the pocket query function there is a limitation on the distance allowed for any PQ namely 500 miles I have a weekly PQ for my own caches which I then use to refresh a list in GSAK However for me with my 'My owned' list I am always missing one cache - an Earthcache which is just short of 2000 miles (ATCF) from my Home location. I understand why there is a restriction but surely cant this be balanced against how many caches you are requesting in your PQ My list consists of only 10 caches and so is not generating a lot of information but is still missing that one cache. Is there a reason why this cant be done thanks

Thanks for all the comments - I have been able to establish what would and would not constitute a cache code from a UK Reg number With all my wanderings I have spotted 64 numbers that I have checked (I have spotted many more but not always in a position to note the number down) of those 53 came up with cache codes (the other 11 had a 'U' or 'L' in the last 3 letters so no good) 11 of the 53 had either an 'S' or an 'O' - though when these were input into the cache search box they came back with an amended '5' or '0' So of these 53, 18 are still active caches, 34 archived and 1 unpublished (as mentioned earlier) 12 countries, mainly the US and Germany - however I finally spotted one from the UK .. AND it happened to be one that I have found too

Do you come up with the cache page when you do this - all I come up with is as shown in the attached

Having just tried the above - I note that you still come up with the 'This cache is unpublished' box and no information - however one useful bit gleaned from the search is the name of the cache in the address bar

Hi From my experience archived caches do come up when doing that search - they have to date anyway regarding searching any cache however - that URL link....Very useful to know - thank you

Eeek - that code (and those around it) was issued back in 2007 - so this has been unpublished for over 10 years !!!! Ok, well at least that explains the anomaly with that one cheers

thats the 4 I identified and we don't have 'i's in our reg plates either - thank you

Any reason why GC14ENW didn't make it as a GC code then ?

This may sound an odd question - however this is related to an topic being discussed in the UK specifically because of links to car registration plates or vehicle license plates as they are known elsewhere The background.... We have noted in the UK, and in particular in the county of Kent, that a good number of vehicles have registration plates that begin with the two letters 'GC' (there are around 470 different combinations of 2 letters that start the current registration plate system in the UK, from AA to YY) and more interestingly (though probably not to most) are of the right length to be similar to GC codes i.e GC15 CDY - this is a registration plate for an Alfa Romeo - it is also the GC code for a cache in the US which is still active. We have noted that any vehicles that begin with the letters GC are in fact centered around the area of Maidstone in Kent (the vehicle licensing office) and so most vehicles with these plates are likely to be seen in the area of the SE of England So we have made a game out of this to see if we spot any registration plates that 1) are GC codes anywhere 2) are GC codes for caches in the UK 3) are GC codes for caches that you have found or own In identifying several it has been noted that many are not coming up as cache codes (for example - GC14ENW, GC14LZO, GC15LLM, GC15LLR, GC15WNU, GC17WLU are registration plates that when put into the search on GC.com shows as invalid code) and so .... I come to my question Which letters are not used when GC codes are allotted ? It is evident from the above that L and U are probably not used but I was surprised by the first one as E, N and W have all been seen in GC codes that are valid. I am also aware that letters such a O and S are not used - however we have noted that when these are put into the GC.com search box the result comes back with 0 or 5 (respectively in those two cases) for example when putting in GC14ACO (registration of a blue Ford) it comes back with GC14AC0 an archived cache in Denmark Thanks Tim

I have just tried to search for all mystery caches that I haven't found within a 10 mile radius of my home location (those were the criteria I set) The result came back with 1 cache in the 10 mile limit but also listed 10 other caches that were between 40 and 50 miles away (in fact they were 10 caches that I had corrected co-ords on) When I up the criteria to 15 miles it lists 100 - 29 of those are not within the 15 miles Though I dont mind the system reminding me of caches that I had corrected the co-ords for (albeit what it lists are a bit random - in the first search mentioned there are many other caches with corrected co-ords nearer than those 10) this was not what was required of the search Is this a glitch or a new feature ?