worldtraveler

If you want to skip the postage, and if your TB can legally travel in carry-on luggage, I can take it to the US this Thursday. I'm staying in a hotel at AMS airport, but I hope to find a few caches around the central part of town tomorrow. You could hide it in a cache and post the name or number here so I can try to find it, or we can arrange to meet somewhere if you prefer.

Yeah, but I suspect it wouldn't be the first time. BTW - I've never ask before, but do you perchance have red hair, and could Jeremy possibly be your stepfather? That would explain a lot about the priority of Wherigo to Groundspeak.

Yeah, but I suspect it wouldn't be the first time.

I've been patiently waiting for more than a year now, and 2012 is rapidly drawing to a close; so I thought I should probably go ahead and download Groundspeak's new Wherigo builder that was on their "to do" list for this year. Does anybody have a link to it? My search thus far has been unsuccessful. Thanks.

Thanks for the update, Ranger Fox. Does this mean what I think it does - that the aforementioned fixes/patches/workarounds are not going to work now on any 64-bit (Vista and Windows 7) system?

Since feature requests are considered based partly on responses in this forum, please consider this one more request for some way to download maps for offline use for anywhere in the world. My current workaround when outside the U.S. is to use the MotionX GPS app to download maps for offline use while I'm connected via wifi and then toggle between that app and the Geocaching app while I'm offline navigating to within close proximity to the cache GZ before switching exclusively to the Geocaching app once the map is no longer needed. The MotionX maps are not nearly as up to date as Bing or Google; but they are a whole lot better than no maps at all, and the options to select zoom levels and download maps either within a certain radius or along a route are nice.

I downloaded the Groundspeak Wherigo app and successfully used it on the Wherigo Player Tutorial. I enjoyed the experience; however, am I the only person who can't get Pinch and Zoom to work when viewing the Wherigo website from within the app? I haven't read any other complaints about this limitation, but I find it difficult to search, download cartridges, etc. Turning the screen to landscape helps, but functional pinch and zoom would be much better. Thanks.

These are two adjacent shops in a mall a few miles from the Hong Kong airport. I doubt the juxtaposition was intentional, but I thought it was interesting. Are you ready?

Just to ensure the obvious is not overlooked - while the travel bug tags themselves are not a problem, they are sometimes attached to items that may be prohibited in carry on or checked baggage. Know before you go.

Here's the answer I gave to the same question in 2003 and again in 2005. Nothing I've seen or read since then has altered my opinion. Characteristics of caches that I considered lame: Containers inadequate for their environment. If they can't protect the logbook & contents from the elements, they are trash-in-the-making. I've NEVER found a Gladware cache that wasn't ready for the trashbin. Lack of a decent logbook. Loose sheets (or scraps) of paper, or poorly bound logbooks are shoddy, IMO. Geocaching.com sells decent, durable logbooks. Buy them or something at least as good. If it's a microcache, consider using the letter & logsheet appropriate for the size. Trashy location. I'm up for a good challenge, and I don't mind getting dirty; but I don't like wading through heaps of trash and other refuse while searching for a cache. Even if the purpose of the cache is CITO, try to find a nice place for the cache. When I find a cache with these characteristics, I get the impression (right or wrong) that the owner doesn't really care much about the sport or its participants, but has placed it primarily for his own ego gratification. Some of the other cache characteristics mentioned here such as needle-in-haystack micros I wouldn't personally describe as lame per se - I just don't hunt 'em because I don't enjoy 'em. YMMV.

Yeah, maybe too popular. The way travel bugs and geocoins are absconded, I can only imagine how quickly a trackable wheel cover would disappear unless padlocked to the vehicle.

Just be sure the golf ball is a new one. The real danger if it's an old beat up one is that someone will think it's good swag and put it in another cache!

Yeah, I'm not going to get any "green" awards for caching efficiency. The sad truth is, I'm way over a million miles traveled, but work crowds out geocaching far too often, and I'm frequently unable (or too lazy) to find a cache at each place I happen to be.

To answer the OP's question, I am in favor of virtuals being reinstated as a submittable cache type. The reason for them being included in the early days has not changed. There are still many interesting locations around the world where physical caches are prohibited by law or are otherwise inappropriate. One physical cache that immediately comes to mind is GC1CE0. Because the coordinates were posted on this website, I had a destination I never would have otherwise known about or visited; but it was simply an inappropriate location for a physical cache. Had it been posted as a virtual cache, other geocachers could still be enjoying it today. I know the history and the reasons given for disallowing new virtuals. I also know this is Jeremy's sandbox and that he can make up whatever rules he wants. I just disagree that this was the best one for geocaching, and I choose to not support the substitute he has proffered in the form of Waymarking. I continue to hope he will eventually recognize the value and legitimacy of virtual caches and figure out a way to consistently allow the "Wow!"s while filtering out the old sneakers. With less than 600 finds in nearly nine years, it's clearly not about the number of smileys for me. It also has never been about the box. When I started geocaching, I knew almost every set of coordinates I loaded into my Garmin would take me to a really neat place or challenge me with an interesting hide technique. Often it was both. That's still what I hope for, but I hate missing out on some neat places simply because an earlier explorer was unable or knew better than to hide a box there.

Wow! Thanks, briansnat. I'm really honored by the nomination, especially coming from you. I really don't know whether others have found caches in more countries, but I'm almost certain no one has a worse cache-to-miles ratio. With only 549 cache finds in 672,426 miles, that's about one for every 1225 miles traveled.

Dude, don't let me down. I was surprised, but I had to call it as I saw it. I browsed through the posts, and they appear to be legit. There were a few that I'm not sure are in the correct order simply due to the time required for travel between the finds, but it wouldn't account for the mileage difference between it and mine. I'm pretty certain it belongs to a flight crew member (pilot or flight attendant), and my guess is United Airlines. I travel a lot, but most of my stays are at least four days in each city. I can't compete with someone who stays only a day or two between stops. I had become somewhat complacent thinking my mileage was way beyond anyone else, and I hadn't even looked for caches on several long trips over the past year. I guess I'll have to step it up a notch to stay in the running.

I think I can help with this part. I'm pretty certain my personal travel bug has logged more actual miles than any other. Correction: I just happened upon this travel bug mentioned in another log. It has more miles than mine.

I think I can help with this part. I'm pretty certain my personal travel bug has logged more actual miles than any other.

That may possibly be the farthest-traveled "free range" TB, but this personal travel bug has more than twice the mileage.

Okay, you asked... Worldtraveling Old Glory #3 logged 15, 458 miles before being grabbed by a cacher in Alberta 2 years ago. It hasn't been heard from since. Worldtraveling Old Glory #1 logged 16,801 miles before being stolen from a chache in Texas almost 4 years ago. World Traveling Old Glory #10 currently has 18,720 miles on it. It spent the last 10 months in the hands of a geocacher in Texas, but it has recently been put in a cache. Here's hoping it can continue its journey home. World Traveling Old Glory #6 logged 35,805 miles before being stolen from a cache in Texas 2 years ago. Given the track records of these and 6 other travel bugs I launched into the wild, I think the odds are against most "free range" travel bugs obtaining really high mileage. Fortunately, however, many of us have personal travel bugs. Many of them go far, but I don't know of any travel bug that has exceeded the mileage of my Worldtraveler. It has logged an honest 604,829.9 miles.

And now it's over 600K miles! Having just found my 500th cache, I think I also qualify for worst cache mileage

My farthest-traveled free range travel bug is World Traveling Old Glory #6. It logged 35,804.8 miles before going missing over a year ago. I'm pretty sure my personal travel bug still holds the record for most actual miles traveled. It's currently at 587,465 miles.

I think my personal travel bug is still the record holder for actual miles traveled from cache to cache (currently 578,133.8 miles).

I understand your desire to help out, but consider this: The owner may just be an infrequent participant in this activity, and the lack of a response to your emails is not a justification to hold onto his/her travel bug beyond the normal time limit. The tag can still travel with the remains of the TB in a ziplock bag, if necessary.

You've answered your own question. It is our nature to be offended by a perceived wrong. It has nothing to do with geocaching, or whether the perception is objectively accurate or logically consistent. Jeremy hasn't handed down the 10 Commandments of Geocache Logging from Mt. Rainier, so (to paraphrase Judges 21:25) "every geocacher does what is right in his own eyes". Hence, the diversity which sometimes leads to discord.