Spurges

This is a difference between the Windows version and the Mac OS/x version. On my iMac, I can select (one or) multiple caches in the list, right-click and change between Symbol Only, Name Only and Symbol and Name. On the Windows version, it could only be done one at a time. Note: It has been a long time since I used Basecamp for cache-run planning; so things may have changed either way since then.

Except that, if they are removing functionality entirely, we may loose the coordinate update and the multiple images, etc.; in the API as well.

Cache maintenance has been an issue for years, particularly caches put out by people who lose interest in the game and never archive their caches. While this doesn't take the place of volunteer reviewers, it's an automated tool that was put out there to try and prompt cache owners to fix potential issues before the reviewers have to get involved. For those caches that are being well maintained by proactive, responsible cache owners, it is a non-event. It was hardly a non-event when my seven-week-old D2/T5 cache was pinged last Christmas after just one DNF. The options it gave me were to immediately visit the cache, "repair" it and log an OM, disable it until I could do so, or archive it. It's a T5 cache for a reason, I can't just drive up to it and take a quick look, particularly when it turned out that the DNF, like most DNFs, was because the searcher was looking in the wrong place. She went back a week later and found it. I don't know whether the algorithm has been tweaked since then, but if it's still targeting high-terrain caches then I'm reluctant to hide any more like that. IMHO they need to add one additional option. Not an option to ignore the message; but an option to provide constructive feedback directly to the maintainer(s) of the algorithm. If they are not told of the FALSE POSITIVES, and why the CO believes it is a false positive, they will not know they need to tweak the algorithm or how. It is rather sad that TPTB don't solicit feedback from the very people who make their system possible.

or while you are sitting on a rock at GZ composing your log on your smart phone. I have only 1 intentional FTF. I didn't log it for about a week. Special circumstances - it was retracted before I got home. I have 1 accidental FTF. I waited 48 hours (I think) to log my cache run. I didn't know I had an FTF until I got an email from the CO, explaining that he had archived the cache I logged, and replaced it with the one I found. My logging is usually about 24 hours after my run. If I get an FTF, I will try to get my logging done more quickly (as a courtesy). But I do not have a smart phone, and I will not log from the field ... ever.

That is the term they use for their Waymarking site already. I have always considered it (Geocaching) "high-tech hide-and-seek". The "treasure hunt" phrase is (IMHO) purely marketing to trick more muggles into buying membership or the app. While "scavenger hunt" sort-of works, I usually consider that phrase to mean guessing where you might find some arbitrary object and searching for it. No, I think "Hide-and-Seek" fits better. Back On Topic: I don't think Geocaching is "dead", I think it has moved. The "Gen1" folks are still out in the forests searching for containers of the quality they (and I) like. The "Gen2" folks are running around parking lots, lifting skirts. And the "Gen3" folks are just jumping out of (almost) moving cars every 528 ft to grab a guardrail. I have NO data to backup my suppositions, it's just they way I think.

In my mind, GZ has always meant the posted (or corrected) coordinates. Basically, my stated destination. The Geocaching Glossary of Terms seems to agree with me (maybe that's where I got it):

Your OP indicates you loaded the PQ into the device. Are you using the PQ or the API refresh on the device? It is the PQ (Pocket Query) that contains the erroneous data. It contains a set of coordinates, that are your corrected coordinates, but the flag in the PQ does not say they are corrected, implying that they are the original coordinates. If you want the Original Coordinates and the Corrected Coordinates and the "IsCorrected" flag, do not use a Pocket Query; use the API to refresh the caches.

Last month - find number 151 - I bumped into another cacher. That was the first time that I unintentionally met someone on the hunt. I went to a CITO event this year, and obviously met some cachers there. I also metup with a CO a few weeks ago, because a couple of stages of a multi had succumbed to Mother Nature, and he wanted to check on and repair them. I have had a couple of people on the Hike and Bike trails ask me if I'm geocaching (as they rode by). I've also spotted the same name in several logs with the current date, making me believe I am "right behind" someone; never caught up to them though.

Remember - or if you don't already know, be aware - photos taken with your iPhone (or other GPS enabled device) are going to have the GPS coordinates embedded in the EXIF data. Geocaching.com does not remove the EXIF data when a photo is uploaded - I just tested it by downloading one from my gallery.

Yes. But the issue of duplicate logs posted via the API is related to the issue of duplicate logs posted via the web site, and is related to the issue of multiple Find logs (which may or may not be intentional/acceptable, depending on the context). And I think that truly duplicate logs (same date, same type, came content) can be discarded safely. But if anything is different (date, type, or content), then it isn't a duplicate and should be handled with more care (e.g., a pop-up warning if logging via the web site). (emphasis added) +1 Why is this so difficult to understand? There is absolutely no benefit to an exactly duplicated log (except to inflate the loggers "Found It" count). You want to log the same cache (or event) twice? Fine! use different words. Even adding a period (".") will make the content different. When a device re-tries a log, because of a timeout, it will send the exact same data. This can be safely ignored - in fact, it should be ignored, to protect the integrity of the database. And, if handled on the backend (i.e. in the API), then the various front-ends - phone apps, 3rd party apps, even the website, do not have to be modified.

Searching for a cache today, I was reviewing the previous logs (looking for a hint). I came across this log What's that old saying? "If I tell you three times, it must be true"

Our reviewers explicitly don't look at that date, and in fact tend to react negatively if you insist on using it as an indicator of a cache owner's activity, for precisely the reason that it's a completely useless statistic these days. It should either be replaced with a "last activity" date, or removed entirely, IMO. It serves no useful purpose at all in its current form. Or perhaps, add adjacent to it, "Last Log Date". When I am looking at a cache that has not been found in a couple of years, and has some recent DNF's; I check the CO's profile. If "Last Visit" is not recent, I also check their (find) logs: "Geocaches" tab, "All Geocache Finds" (link). If the last log date is old, then I figure they are not "active". I guess they could have a string of recent DNF's that will not show here, but this seems to me to be the most data we can get on the CO.

Anyone who owns property in an HOA governed neighborhood, is a member of the HOA. So that's a moot point, really. Unless he is on the Board of Directors, he has no more authority than any other home owner in the association. +1 Picture this: the new Land Manager for that massive State park down the road is driving home in this neighborhood (they have to live somewhere, right?). He sees two police cars, lights flashing, and two civilians on the side of the road. Being a concerned resident, he inquires about the goings on. He learns that a geocacher in the neighborhood is trying to convince the police that the other geocacher is OK to trespass because he (cacher #1) hid the cache (in violation of the rules of the game). And, after all, the cache has been there for 10 years and has been found by 164 other Trespassing geocachers. Our Land Manager, upon returning to work the next day, learns that he has complete autonomy concerning the Geocaching guidelines in his 4,000 square mile park. Well, all he knows about geocachers is that they encourage other geocachers to trespass, and that they have no qualms about trespassing. Ergo, geocachers are scofflaws. So, he decides to ban all geocaching in his park. Any math wiz out there want to tell us how many potential caches have been lost; assuming placement within the guidelines - which, according to some, are not really important? No. We, as responsible geocachers, must police our own game. If a cache is in violation of the rules - and especially, if it encourages the breaking of laws - it must be reported.

I have but one trackable, and I haven't had it long enough for this to be a problem. However, I intend to get more, and will likely (eventually) run into this problem. I would suggest a response to that site along the following lines: If you are certain that this site is facilitating false logs on your TB's, you might also send an email to Groundspeak, documenting their (ab)use of the API. If phony logs are coming from registered API partners, GS should take action against or require action from them. Explain to GS, that if the Trackables segment of the game continues its downward spiral, people will stop buying Trackables from GS. Well, that's my USD 0.02 worth.

Geocaching 101 (emphasis added) The more geocachers ignore the rules, the more land owners/managers will ban caches because they don't want a bunch of unruly thugs on their property. The actions of the one, outweigh the actions of the many.

Why not ask the CO first instead of "going over his/her head" to a reviewer. NA is certainly not necessary as it might well be there is permission and thus nothing wrong with the cache. Most of the NA I see around here is if nothing happens after a few NM (mostly because CO's are no longer active or interested). I see NA as a last resort. I think I would log a DNF, specifically showing the text of the sign (or a photo) and asking for an update to the cache page that the hider and the seekers have permission to be there. DNF logs are emailed to the CO, so that should get a response, no? If I don't get a response and come back later to clear out the non-smiley's; and the page has not been updated, I might log a NM. O.T. People here keep saying to email the reviewer. How do you find the reviewer, in order to send an email?

(emphasis added) I have to agree with niraD. Even if you want to allow multiple finds on the same cache on the same day, why would you want to use the exact same text. If the text is exactly the same, there is no need for a second (or subsequent) log. Anyone looking at the log is going to ignore the duplicates, anyway. However, the duplicates create a problem when you load your GPSr with only 5 (or even 10) logs. I went for a cache on Saturday (GC2VQQM) - 9 of the last 10 logs were duplicate DNF logs. An obvious error (multiple submit presses either from the app or the website), but that meant I had only 2 meaningful logs in the GPSr. Preventing duplicate (exact duplicate) logs would eliminate this problem. I believe the majority of the users would benefit from this.

The "Show on Map" is in the top half of the popup menu. In the bottom half, there are three additional options (along with some other options): Show Symbol and Name on Map Show Symbol and Id on Map Show Symbol on Map I came across this same issue a month or so ago and found these options. I don't remember if I had to update BaseCamp or not, so check your version. Also, try right-clicking on a single cache and see if it is in the popup menu. When you select multiple entries and right-click, the option will not be present if there is something else selected as well - such as a route, or a track. Even selecting a waypoint and a geocache will prevent the menu from showing these options (I think) - eventhough the same options appear for a waypoint.

For my Garmin nuvi, I used Garmin's POI Loader. It took some getting used to, but it did the job. For Geocaching, I now use an eTrax10 which I load from BaseCamp (also free from Garmin). BaseCamp can load the nuvi with waypoints, but I saw some weird stuff happen when I tried to load Geocaches into it (maybe I did something wrong, I'm not sure).

I have never hidden a cache, so I have no direct experience with the loss of one of my own. However, the guidelines are clear; caches are to be labeled. I can't tell you the last time I found one that was labeled (except for the Precint 4 GeoChallenge). Even a lock-n-lock can look like trash after sitting outdoors for a few months. Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines (emphasis added) For those uneducated in geocaching, the "Official Geocache - Do not Disturb" label, might be enough to give them pause. Obviously, it is not going to stop the determined vandal; but it might prevent the loss by someone who thinks they are picking up litter or otherwise cleaning up the area. I think it would certainly cut down on park employees removing them, who maybe know about geocaching, but are keeping their area of responsibility clean and tidy. It would be interesting to know the disappearance rate of labeled caches vs. un-labeled. Maybe it's not any different? I don't know.

When I started, I used my Garmin nuvi 2xx from the car. With it set to off-road mode, it did very well. I switched to a hiking-style GPSr for two reasons: 1) I got tired of changing the settings back and forth on the nuvi (driving vs. caching); and 2) Spare batteries - when the nuvi's battery died, that was it for the day (and you better hope you can find your way back to the car). I never used a phone, same problem - you can't change the battery (well, not in my iPhone anyway). I currently use a Garmin eTrex 10 - low cost, and adequate for my caching style. I carry two spare sets of rechargeable batteries but I've been getting two or three 4-hour caching runs on a single charge, so far.

Using BaseCamp 4.4.6 on iMac 10.10.2 Select the folder that contains your caches (from the "On My Computer" section of the left side panel) Select multiple caches in the list below the folder list -- select ONLY caches (no other waypoints) Right-Click and Select "Show Symbol on Map" from the context menu.

You can write a NICE note to the newbie cacher and gently explain what trackables are all about and how much fun people have watching to see where they go. And you can suggest that they might want to purchase a trackable to send out in the world and their child can then watch it to see where it goes. +1 (from someone who has received such an email) I received an email back in 2011, 6 weeks after retrieving a Travel Bug (http://coord.info/TL1P2088). Personal issues had forced me to drop out of the game, suddenly; and I completely forgot I had taken this Bug. When I received the email, I pulled my backpack out of the closet, and there it was, hanging from the strap. I don't remember the text of the email; but I was not offended by it. I was glad to be reminded; I had no intention or desire to keep it. I made a quick cache run to get it back on it's way. P.S. The author of the email I received was not the CO nor the TO; just another cacher (as far as I can tell).