Flintstone5611

For me it is the fear of a newbie hide. I have been stung a few times by rookie placers, that is not to say that I haven't seen some amazing first hides. I just find that if I am having trouble and it is a first time hide I sometimes default to thinking the problem is theirs not mine. My error, but I hate when that happens!

Lol, so you weren't trying to cast a negative spin on FTF caching with this comment? My mistake, it just sounded nothing like "FTF Chickens - People who are afraid to run out. You know who you are. You get the notification and hesitate to run out. Has this ever happened to you, and why?" Don't know how I missed it.

CHICKEN! You are supposed to go in with guns blazing like Bruce Willis in Die Hard. Do you have no concept of the true meaning of the FTF? I think, you gotta move your FTF hating to another thread. Let's stick to the OP.

Another great comment for another topic, lol!

I will be the first. It happened last night, 11 new caches came out about 17miles away and it was too cold to go. It felt like -25C, which is plenty cold, but I still feel like a chicken this morning.

There I fixed that for ya.

I don't like it for a few reasons, some puzzles are ridiculously hard and as such present an awesome challenge. How does it feel when someone gets an unfair advantage and makes the find? I hate the thought of that. I think that if the reviewer suspects that a cache is breaking a guideline then they should specifically ask about it. If it is brought to their attention after publishing (as with many traditionals that break guidelines) they can easily archive the cache. Could you imagine what it would be like if every magician had to fess up how they do their tricks that amaze and astound us? As it is there are sites dedicated to revealing puzzle cache coordinates, why add another complication to it by giving an anonymous person the exact way to solve it? I really feel that the responsibility of the reviewers is not to approve but to review. Why should they be able to assess whether or not a puzzle is solvable?! It may be well over their expertise and unsolvable by them. I understand the goal but I disagree with this method.

A portion of the guidelines was brought to my attention regarding puzzle caches that was quite disconcerting to me. It says that we have to reveal the way to solve the puzzle to the reviewer for it to be published. I fell off my chair, how long has this been in play and has anyone seen or heard that it was enforced? Why would we have to divulge the secret to our methods if they already have the final coords? The wording in the guidelines goes like this: "Before you submit the cache listing, post a Note to Reviewer with an explanation of how the puzzle is solved. This log will auto-delete on publication." Am I behind the curve or is this a newer addition? I'd love to hear your comments.

Until someone disproves it, yes.

I've always assumed a 1T meant the cache is specifically "wheelchair accessible" rather than the much broader "handicapped accessible." There are many physical and mental handicaps that wouldn't prevent geocachers from accessing most T1.5 or higher caches. My deaf friend, for example, can climb more mountains than I can. Well if you check the link in my statement you will see your mistake according to TPTB. Many have handicaps that demand a similar terrain but there are also height issues with regard to someone in a wheelchair. Besides other strategic disadvantages. Going on grass doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't wheelchair accessible, but getting to GZ may require going up 20 stairs with no ramp, the handicaching website has a thorough description as well.

Monitored better, you mean monitored at all. Unfortunately there is no way for there to have an accurate policing of the rating, since it would require trained people to visit every cache. But I understand your angst with regard to exaggerated ratings, seems like some will rate caches based on their abilities and not for the general public. Keeps it interesting though. Btw, I think a 1T is supposed to mean "handicapped accessible" not necessarily wheelchair accessibility, that is what the attribute is for. Here is the rating system and it doesn't specify wheelchairs per se, but many reviewers use that as the default stance, so I could understand the assumption.

I have had some reviewers prodding me about spots that I have but are being requested by other cachers. It was as simple as "I am still working on this cache" and that was the end of the discussion. It was followed up by an archival if I didn't leave an update after 30 days, but I then requested it to be unarchived and it was. I think it is just to make sure that spots aren't being horded.

No point in arguing this, but you can get creative. Pound a 6" spike into a tree and put a reflector on the head and now it is a fire tack. You don't need to nail stuff to a tree, you can always hang it. I was a little flustered with that "rule" and made a hide in a tree with the hint: "magnetic". It had a metal fire tack and I as able to magnetize the container to the fire tack and so as they are walking around the trees they were looking for something magnetic. Got a couple good laughs.

I have always had a problem with the breadth of that statement. I feel that it is stressed to the letter for somethings and yet miraculously allowed/underdstood with respect to other things. How does anyone hide a hollowed out log/stump our a drilled out rock? Aren't those property? How does anyone make a hide with old soda bottles, didn't they belong to someone? Their defacement will be permanent in most cases. I find that although we can deface things to create a cool camo or hide we aren't allowed to touch the surrounding area although we may have permissio/ownership to do so? That has always felt a little hypocritical to me.

That may be a bit of an exaggeration. A single scree in an oak tree would neither weaken not make it vulnerable. But nonetheless, it is the guideline.

I could see that being an issue with it being your own log. With contacting the reviewers it can remain anonymous and still draw the right attention to it. On the other side of the coin, if it doesn't get a response perhaps it can also be telling about how serious we should be taking our stand. If the reviewers are having a "bigger fish to fry" mentality about it, maybe we need to move on too.

Why wait, if you feel it should be reported go for it. If not, move on with your life. Why be cowardly about it?

Interesting. I can totally understand your conundrum, but is it that the letter of the law is being overstepped or that you feel guilty loving a cache that breaks the rules. If you are concerned with the rules, report them. If you are torn by your appreciation of their creativity against the letter of the law, I feel for you. I think there will be a strong weigh in on this. Good topic!

Of course not. We don't need a committee to count our body hair or to figure to how many hops to cross the country. Because those things don't matter either. This is a non-competitive hobby, you can't win at it. At least not officially.

As far as we know the coordinates in the film are 34° 8' 22.77N, and 19' 18.1" W. Now I'm pretty sure Nolan would use the coordinates to refer to something in batman history. As I looked over different filming locations in batman history I came across the Bronson Canyon which is where they filmed the cave for the 1960s T.V. show. Those coordinates for the Canyon are 34° 7′ 22.33″ N, 118° 18′ 55.8″ W. Now if we subistute 38° 8′ 22.77″ N, for 34° 7′ 22.33″ N and 19' 18.1"W, for 18′ 55.8″ W. This puts us near the cave called "the west portal", and this location is where they filmed the entrance of the batcave for the 1960s T.V. show. Therefore I think Nolan is alluding to the T.V. show through the coordinates which most likely are 34° 8′ 22.77″ N, 118° 19′ 18.1″ W Holy awesome detective work batman52! Seriously though that is pretty cool!

Sweet!

How about turn by turn directions through the app.

Although we can't join you, have a great time. Maybe you will get to visit our EC on the East side of the island.

I have seen people make that comment based on the idea that the log doesn't have a container. But that is easily bypassed with a small baggy attached to it. So although you can't just have an open air magnet cache, there are ways to keep it "legit". Although I am still not sure if that is official or someone trying to apply what they believe to be the letter of the law.

And to be honest, that is the way I like it!