Why aren't cache series allowed anymore? in General geocaching topics Posted September 10, 2011 No. This has come up before. The reviewer should NOT go through the other caches figuring things out. That makes them the owner of the cache and Groundspeak has maintained that they're a listing service to avoid being sued. If a CO goes missing the reviewers do not go out and archive all their traditionals. They let the users file a NA and then archive the caches. So until Groundspeak puts in the guidelines that if when a CO goes "missing" all their caches get archived, this argument is false. So I feel I should expound on my example to make it more relevant: Suppose a CO has a series of 30 piggyback unknown caches (the first being traditional and the others piggybacking). And lets suppose cache number 3 in the series goes missing, as well as the CO. Caches 4-30 have all become unfindable because the coords to cache number 4 can't be obtained. So it will take several NA logs for the rest of the series to get archived. In which, with each NA log, the reviewer will eventually be the one to pull the plug because they are often the ones who have to deal with the NA logs if the owner doesn't respond. Reviewers should not have to deal with that may NA logs. If the series was simplified to one Multi, only one archive will need to take place. Or if the series were just themed (all traditionals), then when one goes missing, typically only that cache needs archived... much less maintenance issues. ALL the caches from that owner do not need archived, only those which cannot be found because a previous stage went missing. Not here to argue of course, just clarifying myself to express my understanding of why the reviewer is not publishing the series, as you asked. I hope it does turn into an amazing series. I loved series, whether they be themed, a trail or whatever. I love heading to caches that I know wont be another LPC before I get to them. Well, it's about time I get out there and cache.