redsox_mark

Given the hints on the cache page ("it's a secret"), I'm pretty sure I'm looking at the right shop; and it is simply a shop which sells underwear. I don't see how it is an issue. There is also a Calvin Klein underwear shop in the same shopping centre. Many other stores have underwear departments. Looking at the list of stores, there is one store in that shopping centre which I CAN see a case for not being "family friendly". Their tag line on their web site is "The Sexual Innovation Experts". However, this store is all over the UK, in many shopping centres and on main shopping streets. This store is on a different floor than the "secret" one. I don't think the cache features this store, but could someone complain about the very existence of such a store in the shopping centre? Who knows, as we are just speculating.

A couple of points I find interesting. Around here, if you can drive to it easily in a 2WD, many COs will rate it as if you drove to it, rather than walked to it from some distance away. If the road requires a 4WD to drive, but can be walked, then the terrain rating will be based on walking. In places where off-road caching is common, I've seen the terrain ratings reflect the off-road difficulty, not walking. E.g. in Qatar, there are many caches in the desert which you can't practically walk from the nearest proper road; it would be miles in a desert and you may not live to get there. There are caches on rough 4WD trails, there are caches where there are no trails at all. There are places with extra dangers of getting stuck. Here it is sensible I think to reflect these in the terrain rating, even if it isn't about walking. I did some T3.5 drives, but stayed away from the harder ones.

It does seem crazy. I hope it gets resolved. I do have a personal issue with that shop, but it has nothing to do with family friendliness. My daughters love it, and I generally end up paying the bill. Worst experience was when I was in one of these with my wife and daughters, and I was not "allowed" to go find some caches nearby as they were only going to be "a few minutes". 2 hours later, I paid the bill and we left.

"Just" do the obvious things, as you would do for a great single cache, but do it for each of the caches in your "series": - Good locations - A nice journey from cache to cache. (e.g. a nice walk or cycle). - Good hides, varied and clever containers. As you mentioned Favourite points; the more caches in the series, the more overall FPs you will get, but the individual caches will likely have a smaller percentage of FPs. If you put just one great cache out, it will get a high % of FPs. If you put out 20 caches, which are each as great as as that "one great cache", finders will be hesitant to give a FP on each, even if they all deserve it. Simply as they may not have enough to give, or be worried about using them all up. So, the best of your great series will get lots of FPs, but others may not get so many.

Yes.. if finding the cache requires a difficult tree climb, then I think the Terrain rating should reflect that, not the D. The difficulty would be how easy it was to find the cache in that tree. If it is a tiny nano and you can't see it from the ground, it is also very difficult. If it is a ammo can with flashing lights, the difficulty would be low. If you had to solve a puzzle to get the combination to open the box, that would also increase the difficulty. I think this is the most useful way to do it. I'm not the youngest or most agile, so I'm looking for high Terrain ratings to flag up a possible warning to me. I don't mind the cache being difficult to find, or a difficult puzzle. Of course some T5 caches I can do, e.g. I have no problems paddling a kayak (on calm water).

I agree.

(This is just me speculating) If GS was ever to issue these England/Scotland/Wales souvenirs, they could be as an alternative to region "state" souvenirs. The regions in the UK (e.g. South West England) aren't in any standard, they were created by UK reviewers. There are 2 regions in Scotland, 2 in Wales, and 10 in England. So they could code, relatively easily I would think, awarding a Scotland souvenir if you find a cache in either "Northern Scotland" or "Southern Scotland".. and similarly for Wales and England. And keep the "Country" listed as United Kingdom.

The GC app is as you say. The website chooses OM for you are the default, and puts you in the box to write your explanation.

This is the puzzle virtual I was talking about. Actually is only D=4; though I haven't been able to solve it, and it has only one finder since being set over a year ago. https://coord.info/GC7B79E You have to send two photos to the CO. But the hard part is figuring out where you need to go.. "and where she went".

I do that, but it is harder if the guidelines are unclear. I've had one case where I was surprised by a tree climb with a low terrain rating. I messaged the CO with my opinion; the CO just replied that I was wrong, read the guidelines.

I've only found 2. One was a 5/5, the other a nice easy one at a historic lighthouse. The 5/5 was in an area (abandoned mine) where I had cached before; it is a great area. The virtual itself was similar to the physical caches there, without the box! There are 2 others nearby I'd like to find but can't. One is a D5 puzzle I can't solve. The other is a 5/5 beyond my abilities. In my very local area, there seems a tendency for extreme virtuals with these. I've seen a few more published recently which I' should be able to do, will try them soon.

I agree the definitions are confusing: Difficulty: Effort needed to solve and find the cache and logbook at GZ. Terrain: Physical effort needed to arrive at coordinates. In the case of a tree climb, where the tree is easy to walk to (say 1.5 to walk to the tree), but the tree is 50 feet up. I think most people rate the tree climb as part of the Terrain, but you can read these definitions to say the effort needed to "arrive at coordinates" is T1.5. But once you get to the coordinates, some difficult effort is needed to access the cache and logbook (which is part of the "find"). So you can read this as the tree climb should be reflected in Difficulty, not Terrain.

It was archived in 2015. https://coord.info/GC13V93

Yes I've found quite a few indoor caches which do not require GPS use (or to be more accurate, GPS is not only not required, it doesn't help). The one in Singapore airport is one. One in an airport in Germany does give coordinates for the main entrance (and then directions from there).. though you can of course find the main entrance without a GPS. It will depend on the reviewer how they interpret the guidelines, and what they notice. Others clearly use GPS. E.g several caches which had multiple outdoor stages using GPS, leading to a final inside a building (often a library). If you have outdoor stages needing GPS, and don't clash with the commercial guidelines, you should be OK.

I agree with this. It is easy to say the COs are over-reacting, petulant, etc. But I commonly see good cache owners getting CHS mails which they feel are unwarranted.. and most of the time they have a similar reaction - it annoys them. Most of them just grumble (e.g. at events, or on social media) rather than archive, but still, the system is causing some bad feeling with good cachers. When this happens, I always tell the cacher that they can ignore it if they feel it is unwarranted (at least until such time as a reviewer takes action). But I feel the communication could be improved. It's an oversimplification; but my general view is that good cache owners don't need these emails, and bad ones generally ignore them.

I agree, stop throwdowns. I have not knowingly found a throwdown yet. I have found 2 containers, but both from the CO (one a replacement for a cache thought to be missing). I've also at least twice found and older/original container, and NOT the replacement (by the CO). In these cases I found a cache and didn't think anything unusual, but then later the CO contacted me and asked me to describe it.. as something in my log made him/her think I found an older one. And sure enough, I had found a long lost version of the cache. Once I found that I stopped looking, so never found the most recent one.

I think it would result in a higher amount of publishes. But also a higher amount of disappointment for those who didn't get one. Even if it is made clear that only a small number will be selected, having an application process will get cachers hopes up. Still, I think it is a good idea.

I've had the experience once where my log was wrongly deleted. I was also accused of doing things I didn't do ("destroying" a cache). For me, while it wasn't the end of the world, it bothered me. Still does. It isn't the one smiley which is the issue, it is the principle. In my case I appealed and had my log reinstated. That made me feel slightly better, so for me it was worth it. Though I would have preferred an apology from the CO. (I tried working with the CO to convince him before the appeal, but that wasn't successful. So yeah, you have to weigh up the "hassle" vs. how you feel.

Thanks, good points. Adopted caches can work both ways. Adopting caches with high FP ratios will make you look better to any algorithm; whilst adopting "ordinary" caches (that don't have FPs) will make you look worse. In the case I was looking at, the adoptions were friendly. The original owner moved out of the area and adopted them out. He has since moved back. Both are good cache owners, though I think the original owner (who didn't get a virtual reward) was more deserving of one.

I wonder if it made a distinction about adopted caches? (I suspect not). I recently saw a Virtual Reward cache from a CO who has several caches with a high percentage of Favourite Points. Most of them were caches they adopted. Whilst it is good they kept them going and maintained them, should adopted caches count the same as ones hidden by the CO?

Whilst they are not telepathic, I have seen reviewers question or fail to publish some events if they feel they are not in the correct "spirit". A couple of examples: 1. A friend tried to publish an event in a country he was visiting which had few, if any, geocachers. The reviewer would not publish it for the reason he/she thought it very unlikely anyone other than the owner would attend. 2. Locally, a cacher submitted a set of events called "filling in the gaps" - where the descriptions stated the purpose was to fill days in his calendar grid. The first set was published, but as he kept submitting more (and they started clashing with regular, well attended events), the reviewer put limits on how many per month they would allow from this cacher. As I live in a place where we have lots of tourists, we do get quite a few visiting cachers holding events. Usually others attend. Some of them I feel they could have made more effort to make it a time where they will likely get more attendees - e.g. a 30 minute event at 10:30 AM midweek isn't the most convenient for most locals. But there may be a good reason they picked that time.

Yes the cache owner is my friend, but I try to be objective. She is an active cache owner, and she does a lot of cache maintenance. But she does own over 500 caches, and sometimes it takes a while. So the cacher who raised the NA was correct that if my friend had less caches, she probably could address them quicker. I didn't get involved other than as a listening board for my friend.

Firstly totally agree on the last point; cachers should not be rude, and rude behaviour should not be tolerated. On the first point (of the 2 I quoted), ideally, yes. But from what I've seen, often this doesn't go well. Cacher A raises a NM or NA. Cacher A thinks it is called for. Cache Owner B doesn't think it is appropriate and tells Cacher A that. Generally I've seen Cacher A feels they are being "told off" (even if it is polite). Seldom do I see a situation where they come to an understanding. Recent example: A friend of mine disabled one of her caches as it was missing, with a note saying "will replace this soon". One month later, Cacher A logs a NA. My friend sends a polite note to Cacher A stating her view that NA was not appropriate here. Cacher A doesn't agree, saying a month isn't "soon", and if she can't maintain her caches then she should get rid of them. Etc... This type of dialog does not leave good feelings for anyone. So I can understand why anyone who is contacted following an NA/NM will feel "told off" to some extent. And that may affect how they use these in future. As a CO, unless I feel the reason for NM/NA is really out of line with "the norm", I will not send a response. E.g. if someone logs NM and says the log felt slightly damp.. I might think that's a bit much, but I would not say anything. If they log NA because it has one DNF yesterday, I might.

In a country where it rains a lot (though not lately!), you will sometimes encounter damp/wet logs. Even if it is a quality container (e.g a lock and lock or ammo can), if it is left open in the pouring rain whilst someone finds it, it will get wet. If it is minor dampness, I would mention it in the log, but not log NM. I would not necessarily expect the CO to rush out to maintain the cache. If it looks like the one the OP posted, I would log a NM. I would also include that photo in my log. Any active CO who sees one of their caches in a state like that should want to do something about it. Often the caches in the worst state are owned by a cacher who is no longer active. If there are previous NMs and no action for a long time then log an NA. Others are owned by active owners, who will maintain the cache, but it may take some time. So at any point in time, even with the best will in the world, wet caches will be found. If you feel they aren't acting fast enough you can log NA, but give the CO a bit of slack. Logging an NA because someone logged NM a week ago, and nothing has happened yet, would not be appropriate in my view. Read some of the threads on quality and health score. Groundspeak is trying to crack down on lack of maintenance. I maintained one of mine yesterday which had a wet and nasty logbook. But the container (a genuine Lock and Lock) was in perfect shape. It had somehow migrated to a completely different hide some 20 or more feet from where I hid it. In whatever adventure caused it to move, perhaps the lid was left off for some time. I cleaned it up and replaced the logbook.

Not sure what my favourite would be.. but I also have one in rhyme. On a cache called The Wandering Poet's Puzzle: For many ages I had no clue About this puzzle; what to do? Then one day something clicked The clues were solved, the checker ticked. Another day whilst hunting cheese I collected all the clues, with ease I returned home and did the math. The final on a likely path! A sunny weekend, spring is here! Firstly had some lunch, and beer. Then in my car, I travelled north Found the path, and headed forth After a short search around A good sized cache was to be found I thank the owner for the stash, The logbook, and then, the cache!