Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by StealthRT

  1. The cache is not mine. Though I can see why one might think it were mine. Looks like it is a stage of an involved multi or puzzle to me. I really would not suspect that the container is abandoned. It could be of course. But it takes a lot of work to set up a puzzle like that and that would be a lot of container to leave in the field.
  2. Welcome to the area. There are a few cachers in your area including a few active cachers in Warrensburg and Sedalia. You will be about an hour out of Kansas City, which as you can imagine has a very active caching community. I’m not sure about what the terrain is like in your part of the Dakotas to give you a comparison. You will have easier access to many more caches that’s for sure. May I ask if you are going to be affiliated with the base in some way?
  3. It looks like a very nice creative container and solid cache so… If it’s really that big of a deal to you… Type up and email stating you are going to fix up the cache a bit and explain what you are going to do. Send this email to the CO. If you have not heard any objections from the CO in a week, proceed with the following. Take a small freezer bag and put the original log into the bag and leave that in the cache with a solid seal. Take another freezer bag and if any items in the cache are salvageable put them in this separate bag. Add some fresh swag to this particular freezer bag if you like. Discard any other items in the cache that have mildewed or are ruined. Then, place a smaller watertight lock-n-lock with a fresh log into the larger container. Label the new smaller watertight lock-n-lock “Fresh Log”. Make any other appropriate repairs that you see fit. Replace the cache in its place and post a short “write note” log explaining what you have done. If you think the cache is worth it, this solution does not take that much effort and it will fix the issue.
  4. By definition, even if I created it, I do not own it. I have no responsibility for it, nor can I take any even if I wanted to. Of course I can complete it. Bad form went out the window once I kissed the frog and it added to my tally.
  5. Oh that was yours. Sorry but I do not think that challenges should be commercial. Next thing you know you get a find every time you drive thru McDs And that's fine that you think that, but it is not what GS thinks. I heard JI talking about putting challenges in Disney World or something like that. Pat's and Geno's are well within the parameters of what action challenges can be about. A challenge to drive through McDs and order one of everything on the dollar menu would have more merit than some out there. Unfortunately, it would also be right up my alley. In fact, I might go do this without the challenge. I'd rather go grab a cheese steak, though.
  6. I have interest. Though my wife may have an interest in me not having an interest.
  7. Can't do it. That's an ALR: additional logging requirement. Not allowed anymore. I would suggest just making better caches. someone has a forum signature: "make the caching world a better place, archive your worst cache" or something like that. I've got one great cache and one okay cache. The okay one I get some short logs and some TFTC. The great cache I get great logs and some favorite points. When I log, if it's a crappy cache I'll log TFTC. There's nothing more to be said. Yet i have found some great caches where I've had to continue onto a separate log because I max'ed out the space we are allowed to write a log in. And they give us a lot of space. I think once I had to write three logs to get everything in. Make a great cache and you will get great logs. Simple as that. I don’t disagree with what you are saying here as a whole, Sol. And I agree with your last line as written. But, I'm sure you agree, even if you make great caches and get great logs, you will still get some empty and lame logs on great caches. I have several pretty good caches for my area. A few finders have given me logs of over 500 words. The longest log I’ve received is 765 words. I have been given many logs with the number of words in the three figures. On those very same caches, though, I have gotten TFTC’s and even blank logs. I think there are a variety of reasons for this. One reason could be that the cache that many see as great, is just not the cup of tea of the person making the log. Some people thrive on bushwhacking. Others think it is rude to put a cache where ticks might dwell. Rather than blast you for making them wade through tall grass, they say nothing at all. I think this can also be due to the fact that some people are limited in time and do not understand how much time is put into putting together a solid cache and that CO’s do care about the logs. Either that or they do know and do not care. Another issue that I think happens more times than we realize, is that the cacher simply feel like they do not have the words to share. Some cachers have great command of the language. Others do not feel comfortable with their writing skills. Sometimes short and sweet logs really relate to the particular cacher’s comfort level with spelling, sentence structure, and composition. A high school diploma is not required to geocache. For many, the dust on their diploma is serious and they do not want to risk potentially embarrassing themselves by trying to write too much. Finally, I think the advent of geocaching applications is feeding the blank log/tftc log numbers. I think this is having a huge impact and I think the way these applications are set up, they are almost training new cachers to not take the time to time out deeper logs. I have logged almost a half million words and almost three million characters. So, as a cacher who relives almost every caching experience as I compose the log and look for something individual to write about the cache or to say to the CO, I understand being bothered or even offended by someone tossing a blank log on a cache that took many hours of work and significant financial resources to set up. I have learned to enjoy the great logs I get, the good logs I get, and to overlook the rest by assuming the individual either hasn’t thought through the etiquette or just doesn’t feel comfortable writing out their logs due to their discomfort with their writing skills. I choose to focus on the good stuff I get and not worry about the rest of it. I assume that if many have had good experiences at the cache, the short log logger may have had a great experience as well. They just didn’t express it. Since there is no requirement for them to express themselves, I’m not going to sweat them. I think this is where Sol has it quite right. Place great caches, get great logs, and enjoy those logs. Choose to not fixate on the weaker logs. All that said, I certainly recognize your (bradley0130) right to be bothered by the short logs if you like and to vent in this forum a bit. Obviously, for reasons already stated by others and the perspective I’ve shared above, I wouldn’t encourage you to develop a cache with an essay requirement. At least not a 500 word essay.
  8. They will look like donuts. little chocolate donuts. I assure you that I will be quite disappointed if they do not taste like little chocolate donuts. Oops. I just noticed hukilaulau said look like donuts, not taste like donuts. Just go ahead and mark me down as disappointed.
  9. ...and actually you have to have a newer iPhone. If your iPhone doesn't have an auto focus camera (I think many iPhone 3’s do not), you can’t do a munzee with it.
  10. I would very much like to see how if feels in the hand. The extra size might be too much, but if not, this would probably end up being my future GPS.
  11. Really? How can Garmin produce a $500 plus unit without including Wherigo capability?
  12. Kansas City is in for an 11-11-11.
  13. I like the design a lot. Might end up being my favorite Iowa coin.
  14. FTFers, the unheralded guinea pigs of the caching community.
  15. There is no issue here. This is a they problem, not a community problem. When they do a “not found” PQ and they see an unfound cache, they should take a minute and look at the cache page. If they aren’t willing to look at the cache page that the CO took tons of time to prepare then I don’t really care that they missed a FTF note. You are a CO of a couple hundred caches. After taking a glance at a few, I hope to come nab a bunch of them later this year. I’m expecting they will be great. Do you really just slap the listing together in 30 seconds? It looks like a ton of work to me. In a least some, you make mention of parking in some of them. You give directions on where to go and not go. You give a feel for what the cache will be. Now maybe some don’t want to know these things as a cacher before the hunt and if that is the case, I respect that. But, still, to not bring up the cache page because they are living off the PQ in a FTF scenario, I just do not see their plight. Which is better in this scenario, the finder posts nothing or the finder posts something? For their convenience, the FTF should stop everything else in their life to go to a Starbucks, pay for internet, write their FTF essay and post as a find log so they don’t have to be bothered to pull up the cache page of the cache they think you want to target? How about the FTF doesn’t post anything at all for a couple days so they have nothing to miss in their precious PQ and they can go out to find out they were third or fourth-to-find with no possibility of warning. Or, how about they simply open up the cache page and read about the cache and the stipulations and the attributes before they go on their hunt. Then maybe they just might notice if there has been anything posted on the cache page. Here is my feedback. You are way off base. This is just another example of how nobody can please anybody in this community. The FTF hounds are upset because nobody posted a find in time to let them know to stay home. The CO is upset because they got a lousy FTF log on a cache they worked so hard to put together (this one might be somewhat justified imo). The STF is upset because he gets ripped because he posted his STF log as soon as he got home, which prevented the FTF from posting their log in the first position of the page. The guy/gal with the FTF gets blasted as a “FTF Wh-re” because he/she is always getting the FTFs and hogging them. When the FTF Super Hound let’s up to be polite and let other cachers have some FTFs, he/she is castigated for not being on their game anymore. And at the end of it all, some are upset because while someone tried to appease everyone else as best they could, they were left out of the “please everyone” mix because for some reason they refuse to bring up the cache page out of a PQ and notice the note. It’s everybody else’s fault. Well, give me the scenario on posting FTFs where everyone is appeased and I will gladly lead the charge to make sure every cacher is informed of the new policy. Seems to me, though, the note scenario appeases the maximum number of cachers and upsets the fewest. Which, as we all know, is the goal of caching. It’s not about the number of caches you find, it’s about the number of cachers you can appease with your caching etiquette.
  16. But that doesn't happen when you delete your first stub found log and then write another. The log sequence will still be correct. But in the meantime you look like a jerk to the CO and the local caching community for posting a found log that says, “FTF, TFTC.”
  17. Very true. Of course, I'm just trying to place a cache, not become a legend.
  18. So spring is in the air and that means everybody getting bit by the cache planting bug. I have had an idea mulling around for a particular plant and started to put my plan into action. I am hesitating, though, as I have now determined that the final cost to put this cache together will be over $100. Obviously, it is an entirely personal decision if I decide to put this cache out or not, but it got me wondering how many caches out there have required three figure investments (or high double figures) before the cache page even gets published. Im thinking if quite a few cache planters have made similar investments, it might encourage me to proceed. Of course, I might get persuaded against proceeding as well. Does anyone have any stories they would like to share about high cost caches?
  19. Good to see you guys at MOGA. Feel free to give me a call and we can talk about some specific ideas that might work.
  20. I’ve seen this done as well. A prominent caching team in our area decided they wanted to have their own logins. I also saw it done by a married team that went on the rocks. I’m not sure if it was enumerated in the divorce decree who got the geocache login and who had to go back through and relog over 1000 caches. Your chances of bouncing into an overzealous anal retentive CO who might delete your logs are minimized by the limited number of caches you are relogging. Plus, most of your finds are in South Carolina. Do they even let overzealous anal retentive people into South Carolina? Now is the time to do it. One hundred is a pain, but a couple thousand would be a massive project. You shouldn’t have a problem.
  21. I applaud your effort, but Groundspeak will not allow adoption of a virtual. That is unless there has been a major policy shift over the winter.
  22. Activated? So, they would be adopted over then?
  • Create New...