MKFmly

OT In a poorly worded attempt to broaden the perspective (TopShelfRob - cachers ruining puzzles), it becomes clear that "potential poor" cacher behaviour may "ruin" ANY cache experience for cache owners (and possibly seekers) as better stated by NYPaddleCacher. As cache owners we do not contol who seeks our caches or what they do with the info they gain on the journey. One can quite rightly "have a problem" with "potential poor" behaviour, but to use that as an excuse to not produce puzzles, or other "creative" caches is detrimental to the game. This type of cacher exists but to such a low proportion it is unreasonable to allow their "potential poor" behaviour to affect anyones hides.

Why limit it to "puzzles", is it not the same issue if someone who found a traditional cache, then shared the D4.5 awesome camo and hide details (making it a 1.5)? As a cache hider you can only control how you envision your cache to be enjoyed and found. After it's published all bets are off...

That is perhaps not the best take away. Every poster values quick and accurate logs, the dissenting opinion is with the methods choosen to express and impliment it. From the OP (and even now) it clearly seems "quick" is valued much more than "accurate"... otherwise with some patience ... this thread would not have started ...

I knew this would come up. Upon an appeal to Groundspeak the basic assumption is that the reviewer made and error. An appeal process is an adversarial process that pits the hider vs the reviewer. Obviously, that is not conducive to an unbiased neutral and successful process. Hence the need for Groundspeak to support their volunteers reviewers and to set the standard and assume this small role themselves. The reviewers then have access to the corporate knowledge of the "group" that deals with all the "non-family friendly" issues: consistency and Groundspeak's ethics, morals, and values are assured.

With all due respect to Justice Potter Stewart but to purloin and modify his popular phrase... The definition of non-family friendly simply should reflect the ethics, morals, and values of Groundspeak, and not their volunteer’s individual "interpretation of them". It would seem prudent for Groundspeak to have a "non-family friendly" cache review board that their volunteer reviewers could access, refer to, or transfer the listing in the rare occurance a cache was to be denied based on that concern.

Cachers geocache, for a variety of reasons and motivations. Trying to pigeon hole and restrict cachers to one single motivator, and then making assessments (and often value judgements) from that single perspective is simplistic, inaccurate, and absurd. Motivations for all cachers vary along a spectrum, drift and change over time, and are more complex and coupled than "it’s all about the smiley" or "it’s not about the numbers". Geocaching is a journey; from initial research (PQ’s) or serendipity (Geocaching live app), to the trip to the cache, to the hunt at ground zero, the eventual find (or not), signing the log book (or not), and recording your adventure (and/or achievement) online. A geocache is simply a destination, a means to and end and not the end itself. Elevating this “final product” to the pinnacle is not the essence of geocaching and to focus on it exclusively is detrimental to the game (although quite popular in the forums). There are many paths that lead to a geocache. Arguably, for some the physical path is the primary reward as is the experience to getting to ground zero. For some the technological path (Wherigo, intercache, chirp, etc.) is the primary reward. For others the mental path (puzzle solving, letterbox, and multiple waypoints) is the primary reward. For some it is the social interaction (family fun) or the meditator (solace, stress reliever) that is the primary reward. For others it is the collection of experiences and achievements that is the primary reward. The beauty of Geocaching is any one cache offers a variety of these paths. The smiley is rarely or never the raison d'être for geocachers or geocaching. The “found it” logs are simply an online continuous record of your adventure(s). You get to write own “Geocaching Adventures” first hand, by choosing the paths to your destinations. How can it get any better than that? To allow others to narrow motivations and limit and choose paths and destinations (based on their own motivators), is not keeping within the spirit of Geocaching. Challenge caches offer an opportunity (not a requirement) to challenge yourself, to keep the game fresh, and to gain experiences that you may want to try, to explore caches (and areas) you may not have considered or encountered before to further author your own Geocaching Adventure.

Off Topic but technically, it can be argued that Henry the VIII had two wives (or four if if you're a catholic).

bad form As discussed many times informative logs (including DNF's) have some value to the cache owner and others. TFTC is (arguably) looked down upon as a fairly lame log. Requiring/Encouraging "DNF, may I have a hint now?" logs further defeat a CO's anticipation/expectation of good cache specific logs and does nothing for a cache page history.

Of course it's always a matter of opinion as shown in this thread. The guidelines and the cache submission page show/provide some examples to illustrate cache sizes. However, to employ an interpretation of that illustration as "the" size is nonsense. Given the volume guideline the OP container at 1.78 liters is clearly almost twice the minimum size of a regular. Further, given the variety of ammo cans cachers encounter they can range from 4.8 liters (five times minimum size of regular) to 29.5 liters (that are clearly a large) so a broad "ammo cans are the minimum for regular" perspective does not necessarily apply.

Check out www.project-gc.com there are many tools, statistics (your own) and for caches, cacher profiles, lists, and it even has the GSAK badgegen built in (Profile - Profile Stats - Badgegen tab).

The online log is there to record YOUR experience, share your experience with your future self, share your experience with the cache owners, and share it with future cachers, past cachers, and "interested" cachers. Do not limit yourself. This article (likely quoted many times) can help most cachers organize their thoughts, find some key points to write about, and overall make a better online log even if you are not a "writer". http://geocacher-u.com/?page_id=13 Using the 4 T's above and evolving to the style/structure Briansnat eloquently outlines below seems a sound log strategy however long they may be. The implication that a long cut and paste log is the same as a "TFTC" can be true, however some thought, organization, and effort was put into that long cut and paste log which cannot be said for most "TFTC"'s. Once posted the long log (even a cut and paste) is a much more valuable record of your experience viewed in the isolation of cache visits and time. Although, sometimes hints and clues are mentioned in logs that is not the raison d'etre. The scanning of logs for clues can be fruitful sometimes however the potential for them being in the last five or last ten logs is small. Further the possibility of the long log preventing someone from "finding" a clue in those five or ten is much less than that. Research and/or preplanning can overcome those difficulties or one can write a long pertinent log for the DNF.

The layout/style of this cache http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=704e9f08-2c27-4627-8cdc-98c1ce461854 could be used for inspiration to choose your own adventure.

Although it lags behind, Project GC (http://project-gc.com/) will also provide that info under profile/find bad logs.

I began working with military GPS in 1994 and did a fair amount of aircraft testing. Using survey grade GPSr's we needed to do a significant amount of pre-mission planning (satellite coverage and constellation) in addition to post processing for cm level accuracies. Needless to say the pre-SA off handhelds I saw were fairly useless units and wildly inaccurate. I did hear about geocaching in 2000 but did not consider hunting Tupperware in the bush (based on the handheld's accuracy) an enjoyable experience. Fast forward to 2009, when the Mrs read an article in “Our Canada” magazine and wanted to try it. I tried to dissuade her but she persisted. So after purchasing a relatively good handheld GPSr we went for our first hunt on Father's day that year and the family was hooked. The “game” allows such a wide variety of motivations and experiences to the participants that the game continuously renews itself. Our motivation can include any and all “approaches” to the game. The one ethos we stick to is we need to have fun and play it our way. I discovered this article online that explained some of the motivations of cachers, http://wing.comp.nus.edu.sg/~forecite/services/omnipage/thang/CHI08pdf/p1177-ohara.pdf. Armed with that knowledge you can avoid most of the “angst” present in the forums as well as the righteousness (open and hidden) that my way is better than your way. As they say if you’re not having fun you’re doing it the wrong way. Motivations for Caching To get out as a family and have and adventure was our first and primary motivation. Since starting geocaching we have been to more small towns, back roads, and "off the beaten path areas" when engaged on our travels that the trip there is fun and not just a race to get from Point A to Point B as fast as possible. You may discover from reading the forums that the only people that worry "about the numbers" are the people who say "its not about the numbers". Although not driven by numbers, it is nice to see your acomplishments grow. But having said that we only compete against ourselves, setting and striving for goals, milestones, or "challenge caches" is motivating.

Please take note that Google satellite imagery is often misaligned with the real world. Using the Google application as a substitute for surveying in your cache location is asking for trouble (use a GPSr not a phone). Satellite imagery is great for getting “close coordinates” for your initial cache page setup but is not appropriate for surveying.

After pressing submit on the "Geocahe" log there is no connection to the TB except going to each "dipped TB" and editing the entry. What would be useful is to have the the "Geocache" log entry automatically (or by choice individual opt in or out) cross posted to the TB log. That way loggers would be encouraged (and forced to go an extra step or two) to perhaps personalize each TB visit a little more... In that way the TB owner at least gets the minor benifit of that "geocache" log and can stay up on the progress. Having said that, as everyone know some logs are short and tedious and may not be an improvment over nothing.

Give OpenWIG a try on the BB. I have used it to sucsessfully find the only WIG in our area but it was a little buggy then hopefully better now. http://code.google.com/p/openwig/