J the Goat

Exactly my thoughts.

Same here, although a bit Southeast of the HF. Happy to give you some suggestions if you're headed this way.

Mine was a regular sized container hidden at the base of a tree behind a baseball field. Didn't know how to use a GPS, but had a good clue and found it right away. The rest is history

I didn't check all the links, but at least one of your California caches links to a different cache.

I'm not sure if I should take offense at that comment. I am a totally responsible cacher yet I can't solve most puzzle caches. One has nothing to do with the other. I thought the exact same thing. The quality of a cacher has nothing to do with their ability to solve puzzles.

I completely agree. It's a horrible idea and should be squashed. Just like this thread will be. IBTL.

I was thinking the same thing. If it was wild growing, it could just be a weak plant or the bugs could have gotten to it. I agree, a shot of the rest of the plant would be pretty helpful. What geographical region was it found in?

You came in asking a question. You got answers that don't please you, so you start to get a little touchy. Why ask questions then? To answer your question, I'd be annoyed if I found this cache and it was rated a 2 star terrain. It's too low. I'd give it at least a 2.5 or a 3 based on your description. Saying that you don't want to give away the hide based on the T rating is like providing soft coords to make the hide more "difficult". Rate them appropriately for people who actually use the ratings to determine which caches they're going to look for.

That's pretty cool. I was pretty jazzed to see the google streets car cruising around a couple months ago. Just thought it was kinda neat

As was stated above, the reviewers in question are the only ones who can really answer the question. I'd guess it had/has something to do with the actual phrasing involved. With the exception of the last line of the cache description about Joe, there's nothing political there at all, it's all history and information. The last line has a little bit of an agenda in there, but not much of one. It also doesn't ask anyone to do anything. There's not much more answer you can get here unless you're looking for opinions. Opinions probably won't be much in your favor given that you came in here on a small rant without giving the whole story.

I think the opportunity for this has long since passed. 1. Owner submits agenda-less cache, which is published. 2. Cache changed by owner post-publication to add material contrary to the solicitation guideline. 3. Reviewer asks owner nicely, and privately, to remove the added material, with a complete explanation of why that request was proper under the guidelines. 4. Owner removes agenda material temporarily, starts this forum thread, and complains to Groundspeak. 5. Owner restores agenda material, now present on the cache page. 6. A Groundspeak Lackey archives and locks the listing. I put the odds of getting the reviewer to overrule Groundspeak's archive log at about the same as the odds that BrianSnat will spend his next vacation doing the ET Highway Power Trail. Keystone is probably one of my favorite people on these forums....

***So, you are saying that there is NO WAY that we can place a cache container less than 528 feet from an existing cache? Yuppers. Keep any eye on the cache that's too close, if it gets archived then that means you can put yours out. Otherwise, Keystone's option is about your only one.

B. Well I stand corrected

I'm no carpenter, but that looks like a fairly newly drilled hole. Not terribly cool methinks.

While I don't know for sure, I know the 10 year anniversary souvenir wasn't limited to logging a few days after the fact. Sounds bogus to me.

Bovine Hill is not only the closest Y2K cache around, but it's in an absolutely gorgeous location. U are Here... has arguably the best views in the area and the hike to get there will getcha sweating in the winter time. Coyote Rock isn't really in anybody's caching area, but it's one of my all time favorites. From the top of the rock we saw a massive herd of Elk just 'a grazin' away. The Lake Pillsbury basin is one of the most scenic, quiet places around here, and this one lets you see a large part of it from the top.

This. Very much this.

I just re-read your post. I missed the initial part about not wanting it archived. In contacting the reviewer, that may be the end result, depending on the communication between the CO and the reviewer.

Well, I wouldn't call somebody who hasn't been onto the site in 2 months an inactive owner. How active were they before that? I suppose you could bring the cache to the reviewers attention based on the lack of maintainence, but assuming the cache itself is still in good shape with the exception of the full log I think that's a little extreme. To answer your question, yes, all you can do is wait if you decide not the contact the reviewer, and then all you can do is wait even if you do contact them. Adoptions have to be initiated by the CO, and won't be done unless that happens.

This isn't true. Your preference may be that it goes from cache to cache, but many bugs get handed off once or twice. If I have a caching friend going to Ohio, and I have a bug that I've been hanging onto or wants to go that direction, I'll hand it to them so the bug can move. Would you rather your traveler sit in one spot than get passed by hand and move?

... or as close as you can remember

I just looked at your trackable page. Now I'm certain you're taking this thing too seriously. There's been plenty of movement, several photos, and an apology for some confusing exchanges all in a very short time. If I were in possession of your trackable and you posted that last note, I'd drop it in a cache and not even log that it was there. Not to mention in your description that you might contact the holder to move it along and want it done within a week? Nope, unless there's something in the emails coming from the other party that are blatantly inappropriate I see nothing wrong with the visable actions on the cache page.

These stories always have 2 sides, but I'd venture to say that there's nobody at "fault" because there's been nothing "wrong". Don't take your trackable too seriously, once it's out you have no control over what happens to it. Badgering somebody won't help. Without knowing the entirety of the story, which we probably never will, it looks to me like you're expectations are too high. At least your trackable got picked back up before the cache got removed.

If I can fit a bag inside - I will use a bag. It's not about the container....its more about the cachers who don't know how to close the containers properly AND don't know how to shut the bags properly either!!! I'm hoping there's context I'm missing there, because it's almost COMPLETELY about the container. I maintain that baggies are useless, and on some level can cause problems by giving people false security in thinking that they'll help keep the logs dry. They don't, pretty plain and simple. Concentrate on good containers instead of concentrating on how to justify bad ones with plastic baggies

I say skip the bag entirely. If you have a waterproof container to begin with, you don't need a bag. If your container isn't waterproof, all the baggie will do is keep the moisture IN.