J the Goat

Wow, that's not even close to what the OP stated. B. Ya Toz, while what you said makes sense, it's a bit of a stretch to reach that conclusion from the OP, at least from this spot in the valley. K, back to my snacks

Annual GeoRally

Mother Faulking Cache

For the love of everything that is hole-y, please don't hide another LPC. The fake bolt on a sign on a hiking trail, or even at a local baseball field, or fishing hole, something.... LPC caches aren't difficult. They're not creative, they're generally a waste of whatever container you put there. I certainly appreciate your attempt at making it different, but believe us when we tell you it's been done to death.

I think this is the way to go. You can add in the attributes so people will get the cache in their pocket queries if they use the filters, but the waypoint will be your best descriptor on the matter.

Micro. If the actual cache fits only a log, it's a micro. I'd be pretty peeved if I showed up with my kids expecting to be able to trade swag and found a bison tube was all there was. List a micro.

No. To say, "It should have been posted better" is like offering constructive criticism in an effort to avoid a repeat of this horribly devastating tragedy. No one who offered that bit of advice is suggesting, in any way, that the park staff's decision to leave what any sane geocache hider would consider critical information regarding a location, (little things like, you must be in a group, you must pay an additional fee, you must sign a waiver, you must pout if you are too slow to grab the FTF, etc) off of their cache page in any way exempts the FTF crew from their responsibility to follow the rules. If it can be demonstrated that the FTF crew violated any rules, (it hasn't happened yet), then I will join you in your finger waggling, though I'll probably stop there, as I'm not seeing any evidence that the FTF crew had any way of knowing they were in violation. Supposed rules spelled out in a supposed flyer that no one can produce?... No "Off Limits" signs posted... No closed gates... Just a bunch of caches posted on a mostly public website by park staff who elected to not include these supposed new rules on the cache pages. Finger waggling, yes. (If they broke any rules) Torches, pitchforks & screaming mobs, no. First off, I like your style once again CR. I pretty much agree with every bit of argument shredding you've done throughout the thread, and also agree that monster chasing pitchfork weilding mobs aren't appropriate for this situation. Thatnks for the thoughtful responses that go beyond "the caches were published so FTF is fair game" type of vibe that some others are putting off. I don't however agree with the highlighted statement above, or not completely at least. There was a quote earlier regarding the park rules and the area restrictions, although I didn't take the time to read back through entire thread to find it so I look silly bringing it up What it boils down to, for me at least, is the CACHERS responsibility to know the rules. That doesn't mean they should be crucified for not following rules that could have been posted better, but my gut feeling (oh boy, here we go) that's only supported by, well.... my gut feeling, is that these cachers knew what they were doing and that they shouldn't have been doing it. That holds absolutely no water in a discussion like this and I get that, but it is what rings in my brain as what happened, on some level. Malice aforethought? Probably not. Complete disregard for some rules that are clearly easy to get around with the expectation of nobody being the wiser? Probably. Did they dodge the group event on purpose? Maybe not, they may not have known. The entrance of the restricted area is where this whole thing rubs me the wrong way. You're not quite as dumb as that bag of hammers you're always talking about buddy, maybe all that gator-dodging has sharpened your wits a bit

:laughing: :laughing:

That's you? I'm the dude swinging a weedwhacker like a baseball bat. Nice to meetcha.

This. I'll use my trekking poles to move stuff out of the way, but that's about it.

I'm not a fan of the TB key/combo thing. I've only done one, and it was a mess. There's huge potential for huge hastle on caches like that. Bugs get lost. Taken across the country. Kept by a newbie cacher. Then you need replacement tags and keys. If you're willing to do the work on them, go for it. It's probably not something I'll ever set up myself though, and likely not one I'd do again unless I found a key by accident.

DW, I do think this is a bit out of context. Irresponsible trail use is different than blatantly ignoring park rules for an FTF. As an answer to the character question (broadly defended through devils advocate positions) The example post was from one of the pair, whose activity gave rise to this discussion. I ask, does this look like the means of caching of someone who follows ORV park rules in the pursuit of finds and/or first to finds? This is why it is a cautionary tale. Sure, go out and find caches, but employ sense, abide park rules and when caches are placed in new areas and there are clear EVENT signs posted, ask. Had that pickup truck truly run into difficulty on technical trails (and some back there really are) how do you defend the pursuit of Geocaching? Luck was with them, but it isn't with everyone always. I understand where you were taking it, but my understanding of this thread was a general cautionary tale using a specific example of something that shouldn't have happened. Park rules were ignored by geocachers and it angered park staff. Whether that was them, or me, or you, that's what happened. Folks are trying to defend the offending cachers, but what it boils down to is that rules weren't followed, in turn creating some bad blood (even if temporary). Anything brining up past logs turns the thread more into an attack on the the cachers in question instead of pointing out the negative impact of their actions, at least IMHO.

Also to add, be ready for this cache to get very few finds because of it's complicated and involved nature. If you're okay with that, go for it. If you're looking for a cache that's visited more frequently, tone it down a bit. Good luck

Excluding the "not allowed" for the transations and "must find" within a certain amount of time, I think it's a very challenging, good idea. Telling people what they must do and putting a time limit on things may even prevent the cache from being published. If you can make the combination so the solvers aren't able to use google translate, that's one thing. Telling people they're not allowed to probably isn't allowed. Now I've confused myself

Those aren't coordinates, those are GC codes; a specific ID number assigned to each geocache. They won't help you find the cache once you're looking for it, but you can use the numbers for reference or to help you remember which cache was which. The coordinates are near the top of the listing and will look something like N39 00.123, W123 22.456

Does this sound responsible to anyone here? Just askin. DW, I do think this is a bit out of context. Irresponsible trail use is different than blatantly ignoring park rules for an FTF.

Does anyone else find it odd this update is scheduled for 10 PM, rather than am? A typo or correct? I guess we'll find out later this morning. I noticed that too. It's either a typo, or a big update that will affect fewer people's using of the site at that hour than in the morning. That's my take at least, and with all the power, influence, and authority I have around here....

Actually, it appears that the cachers in question strolled out onto a field because nobody bothered to tell them it was closed. Then they were publicly vilified for their sins. Here's where you lose me. If there is nothing in place to communicate what is, and what is not, acceptable behavior, (say, for instance, signage telling them to keep out), how were they supposed to know better? They paid their fee, entered an area that was seemingly open to the public, and found caches that were posted on a mostly public website. Not exactly a sin, from where I'm sitting. Or perhaps the flyer they were handed on paying their fees that they have the responsibility to read prior to doing anything else? Yes, I've ignored flyers that I thought I've read before. That doesn't mean I'm not responsible for the rules and regs in said flyer. That, and this restricted area wasn't newly restricted. I'm sure that if anything changed, it was the allowance of ANYONE in the area, so wouldn't it make sense to read the information on the newly opened area before entering it? I'm not anti FTF. Go ahead, race your little hearts out. The bottom line is that we're all responsible to know and follow the rules of the locations in which we're caching. To say "it should have been posted better" is just like saying "it's not our responsiblity to know, it's their responsibility to make sure we know." By maybe, say..... handing out a flyer with the rules? Maybe?

Good idea, and welcome

Well if you ever get desperate, you're welcome to fly me out to your locale and I'll happily bag all your caches Seriously though, that's pretty cool.

I ended up in the emergency room that night with very low blood pressure, severely dehydrated, and overwhelmingly nauseated. As best we can tell, I succumbed to some type of local virus that had been going around. The onset of this thing was the fastet I've ever experienced - I literally couldn't have been affected any faster if someone had hit me in the gut with a baseball bat. This ended up being the only cache I found that weekend. I had big plans to cache in that park, and around Eureka Springs. Glad you were/are alright Mr. Benchmark.

:laughing: :laughing: