J the Goat

I read the problem as your NEW coords put the cache in somebody's front yard. That's what the order of posts on the cache page suggest to me anyhow.

I find myself shaking my head about all the confusion and angst over which light pole houses a crumby micro container... Are you sure it wasn't reviewer notes on your cache page? Not trying to be snarky, just throwing out a possible oversight.

Read the logs. Sometimes the tone of a log can give you an idea about the friendliness of the people.

No, no, no, no, no and no. All of these things will put into place exactly the things the OP is worried about. These are 11 and 12 year old kids. Most of the accounts will be abandoned in a week, real caches will fall apart and not be maintained, teaching FTF shenannigans to kids this age will do nothing to enhance anybody's experience. Geocaching shouldn't be about competetion, and teaching young kids this from a young age will ruin the experience for any of them who actually do decide to continue. Again, I can pretty much promise that any "real" cache that gets set up as part of this project won't be maintained after a month or so, and again, I maintain that geocaching is the wrong medium to teach kids about competion.

I'd be more than happy to help, but it looks like the caches are a bit out of my radius Good luck, I hope they all get swooped up.

At least 1. Do I win? 451.

I just did ~13 miles round trip up and down a mountain yesterday for 11 caches. I'd have done the whole thing for one or two of them alone. Not only that, but there were three up there we didn't have time for. Looks like I'll be doing another 13 or so for 3 caches come spring time. Place it.

I haven't searched for any statistics, but I work in healthcare and have had a needle stick of my own. The nurse was correct in playing it down to you guys, the chances of transmission in a needle stick to the finger are very slim. Even though the needle is hollow, if there was no "injection" of blood into the finger, you're likely safe. Not surely however, so getting tested is very important to follow up on. HIV isn't the worry. Neither is Hep B for that matter. The scary one is Hep C, as there's no vaccine and it can live in dried blood for a long time. Make sure that the tests being repeated will check for that virus in particular. I'm sorry your son has to go through this. It's scary for you and for him. Best of luck.

I've been looking and looking so I didn't ask a stupid question, but I can't find anything. A couple of my icons look different, and some of my T/D stars are blue. I can't figure out why. Can anyone explain this to this clueless goat please?

how do you know if it is a protected species or not? Because I mentioned how we reported one on a redwood tree in a national forest. Either way, it doesn't matter. Protected or not, it's against the guidelines.

And I just re-read the bolded statement above. I think they should be ARCHIVED if no permission has been granted. I don't check to see if every LPC I drive by has permission granted, that WOULD be playing cache cop. Blatant guideline violations are different though, like nails into trees or buried caches. If I find out that an LPC doesn't have express permission, then it gets reported too.

It's this attitude that also makes it hard for cachers to want to report violations. As you see there are many here who support me on the issue. It's the bury your head in the sand or ignoring the guidelines is what hurts the geocaching community. I am not ignoring it or burying my head. I am just trying to avoid cachers who behave like you. Avoid cachers who behave like me? You're the one who indirectly called out the cache owner on the forums. That was real classy on your part. By another cacher the CO has been told to stop what he is doing. So how am I calling him out? And why are you defending violations of guidelines Listen, I've looked at your profile, you've found a lot of caches and equally impressive to me is that you maintain all your hides. You're obviously an asset to the community. I was just giving my point of view. I meant no offense. I've seen plenty of caches that break the guidelines. Unless I'm threatened by a landowner or there are clearly marked NO TRESPASSING signs, I won't make a big stink about it. The notable exception would be something stupid like a cache buried in the Walmart parking lot. But if it's just a minor violation aka nail in tree, I'll personally let it slide and the majority of other folks from my experience will as well. In your particular situation, I guess the area was park property? Perhaps I would report that. Where does it end, though? Should all LPCs be reported in your book because they lack permission? How bout sprinkler head caches? They are 'partially' buried. That's against the guidelines. no? Just my two cents. My answer to both those questions is yes, with the exception of LPC's that have proper permission of course.

It's this attitude that also makes it hard for cachers to want to report violations. As you see there are many here who support me on the issue. It's the bury your head in the sand or ignoring the guidelines is what hurts the geocaching community. I am not ignoring it or burying my head. I am just trying to avoid cachers who behave like you. Avoid cachers who behave like me? You're the one who indirectly called out the cache owner on the forums. That was real classy on your part. And this was a classy statement? This is the problem with favorite points, people start comparing CO's based on favorite points. You ought to keep your rudeness to yourself. The guidelines are what they are. It shouldn't matter if a land owner give permission for a breach of the guidelines. Those who skirt them the guidelines, or fail to report violations are just furthering the problem. I do understand not wanting to play the bad guy, but ultimately you're the good guy for keeping the hobby within the rules.

Jellis, I normally agree with most of what you have to say, but in this instance by not reporting the blatant guideline violations, you're part of the problem. You're telling these cachers and others that it's okay to place caches like this. I know you know this, but I just had to put it out there. The respectable thing to do would be reporting them.

Thank you for clearing this difference to me English is actually not my first language. You said I probably should not log the cache as found after I maintained replaced it on my own accord. OK, I walk away, come back tomorrow morning, sign logbook and log the cache as found. Is anything wrong with that? That's what I meant. Might be more semantics. To maintain a cache that's not your own consists of drying out a wet container, replacing a sopping wet log, or duct taping a hole in the lid. It does not include putting a cache down when you can't find it. I stick to the state of mind that says you can't "find" something that you hid. Doesn't make any sense. I'm sure the "here's a reason I found my own cache" crowd is just hovering over their keyboards right this second, but meh. All that being said, if that's one of the ways that you get enjoyment from the game, knock yourself out

Nemesis will be the first 5/5 I complete once I actually finish it. No special equipment has been needed so far, but with the 40 miles of hiking over 4 trips it's taken to find the first 7 stages and DNF the final once already, and some of the terrain along the way, a solid argument for a true 5/5 can easily be made for this cache.

Can and Should are going to be two different answers from me. The system allows you to, so yes you CAN. You didn't find anything, you placed a cache. I say you SHOULD NOT log a find. Once I'm king of everything, I'll make that a rule and not an opinion

After looking at the cache, it looks like the location isn't a bad one. Question though, why is it the only cache in that patch of trees? That seems like the type of terrain that should have a few more caches for people to find. Is it private property? Muggle problems? No access?

Never gonna happen. As long as folks can get smilies, etiquette and rules can go out the window without a second thought.

What is the purpose for having this particular hide in this particular spot? Is there a neat landmark near? Is this the last bush of it's kind on the planet? Is this where you met your dog? I thoroughly despise people placing caches in areas where there's no reason to have a cache there, just to have a cache there. I'm not saying that's the case with your cache, but if it is then you're going to get logs from people like me. Just my pair of pennies.

I'm curious as to why a 1/1 cache right off the freeway was unarchived after two years

I assume you are referring to explicit permission? Explicitly explicit.

I'd put money on the CO not having permission to have a cache in that particular lamp post.

Just to keep on track... this is not accurate. The OP did not answer any of the three questions asked by the reviewer on his cache page. He is complaining because he has been in the game a long time and has placed a lot of caches. He does not think his cache placing skills should be questioned, and did not consider that there might be another reason for the questions. The next 100+ responses focused on speculation about why some reviewers might be asking standard questions that haven't been asked before, and whether these questions are unreasonable. A couple of cachers have said that if the boilerplate questions become standard, they will no longer litter their areas with micros. (That last statement might show a little bias, but I think this sums up the thread so far.) Looks like a pretty good summary to me...

Agreed. Take them to the place you want them to visit and then to the cache location. +1 more. Use the historical site for some numbers that lead to a wonderfully beautiful location. Best of both worlds