worldtraveler

post deleted by worldtraveler

Sadly, there are no whackers to deploy in the event he doesn't change his mind. It's a pity you've had to revise your log entry twice for no other reason than to try to appease the owner and hope he will not once again falsify the record by deleting your legitimate find. I've added the cache to my watchlist, but I'll refrain from applying any peer pressure at this time because it could just as easily work against you as it could for you. But if he deletes your log a third time, he may find his cache page inundated with factual entries cautioning others about his propensity for deleting accurate logs that he doesn't happen to like.

I agree peer pressure is one form of whack that is usually effective. I am proposing another kind for those who refuse to do the right thing even after peer pressure is applied.

Thanks for the response and for sharing your own example of an injustice. I'm sorry it happened and even more sorry you had no real recourse. I'm not asking for TPTB to be the log police; we, as a community, seem to be pretty good at sorting out the wheat from the chaff. What we lack is the power of enforcement, and that rightfully belongs to TPTB. If they are too busy or just lack the desire to involve themselves, they could always delegate that authority. I would be surprised if they lacked a sufficient number of volunteers to mediate disputes and propose solutions to TPTB for action. I think a few well-placed whacks, where deserved, would go a long way towards curbing abusive behavior.

I'm not disputing the ownership of the actual cache, but I believe Groundspeak owns the online cache logs. Some may even insist the online logs belong to their authors, but I don't think anyone could persuade me they belong to the cache owner. He is more of a steward, I believe, having some authority and responsibility for the truthfulness and acceptability of the online logs. He should not be permitted to violate that trust with impunity, IMO.

Okay, this may only be a game, but it's our game collectively. Assuming the truthfulness of the OP's story is not in dispute, why should a single geocacher be permitted to act as a despot, arbitrarily denying another geocacher credit for a legitimate find while practicing historical revisionism on the cache log? The cache isn't in North Korea, for cryin' out loud! IMO, TPTB should restore the first (accurate) cache log and tell the owner his cache will be archived on the website if he can't play nicely. Let the owner take his box and go home if he wants, but don't permit petty would-be tyrants to get away with such antics.

No problem. But now I'm curious: Which of the ten voices will be singing/humming it?

White. The bear was definitely white.

Yeah. Even better than doing the Hokey Pokey and turning yourself around...

A logical guess, but No, I don't. Tennessee (Memphis area) is my domicile between trips, however.

Here's my personal travel bug. I paste my cache logs into the TB logs so I have a single record of all my caching experiences along with the mileage. I think it has also recorded more actual mileage than any other travel bug.

There was a lot of discussion here back when WAAS was newly available on handhelds. The consensus then, after a lot of field testing in typically tree-covered environments, was that more (though less precise) non-WAAS satellites in view usually yielded a greater positional accuracy than fewer WAAS satellites in view. That's why many of us turned WAAS off. Do any of you experts know if this disturbance is likely to significantly change the results in the field?

Yeah. Bartman (TBC413) photo taken near Pier Pressure (GCM5MA) three travel bugs photo taken near Jailhouse Rock (GC3F7) Scamper the Camper photo taken near Old Saint Lou (GCK5DR) Jeremy's Blue Hornet (TB4452) photo taken near Cent Prk (GCHKF5) (photoshopped my fingers out of this one) Tinkle Tinkle Bell (TBG9CZ) photo taken with the Memphis Belle These are just a few. There usually has to be a picturesque setting nearby or a request on the travel bug's page for me to go to the additional effort. I agree with cachecrashers about the inconvenience of double logging.

What do you mean, "IF"? Actually, A couple weeks per month is enough for me. I can't spend ALL of it geocaching; but expenses are paid, and I manage to enjoy the free time I have. Every place so far has been interesting, though I prefer cool or cold weather and no biting insects or poison plants.

Allanon, FYI - your link worked okay for me. I'm using Adobe Reader v.7.

Yeah, it has definitely been DNG weather in the Midsouth (where Mr. Lost lives) for way too long now. I've lost track of the times I considered going but decided not to because of the heat/humidity. Looks like this Friday will be the best chance for (slightly) cooler temps any time soon. I need to find at least one cache here before leaving town again, though (my personal travel bug needs the mileage. ), so I'll probably be out sweating somewhere this weekend.

Okay, here's mine. Even with the larger image, some of the locations (Alaska, Utah, Fiji, Japan, Denmark, Shanghai, Puerto Rico, Greece, Kazakhstan) don't show up very well. And those found in Sydney and Bangkok are skewed significantly to the west on this map.

Most miles accumulated on a personal travel bug. Or, conversely, worst geocaching mileage (>1K mi/cache found).

Er, um, (cough), you may want to check with the head frog KA; he is the one who first suggested the idea of personal travel bugs, and there was no mention of any "Goddess Eartha" cr*p at the time. But of course I'm biased, because I think my own personal travel bug holds the record for most geocaching miles actually traveled. The highest mileage "free range" travel bug I own is currently this one with 20,588 miles, and the highest mileage travel bug I've found in a cache is "Fly with Me (HAM)" (currently 42,592 miles), but I know there are others out there with considerably more miles.

I agree with you, Jamie. I think the spirit/intent of the proximity/saturation guideline was violated and the approver should not have approved the second cache. From the guideline (bold emphasis mine): I also think the newer cache fails to meet certain specific webcam cache criteria. Compare the web page listing to the requirements shown in bold below: And since webcam caches are non-physical caches like virtuals, why are they not subject to at least the same "out of the ordinary" and "Wow" placement criteria?

Are you out of your ever lovin' mind? Knives are not allowed in caches!!!! Yeah. Things have changed a bit in the last three years, haven't they?

Divine's link gives you a "best case" scenario. But as a foreigner entering the country, you should also know the "worst case" possibility and your legal responsibilities. Here's a pertinent quote from the Consular Information Sheet for Russia issued by the U.S. Dept. of State. I apologize for its length, but this information could keep you out of a Russian prison. Know before you go.

Farthest north and south isn't too difficult, but the answers the "farthest east and west" questions are not as easy. I've carried my Garmin V around the world and across the int'l date line many times; so in one sense, the answer could be 180° E / 180° W. But I think a better way would be to use the highest N/S latitude numbers and E/W longitude numbers at caches I've found. In that case, they would be: North = EARTHQUAKE!!! (Alaska) N61° 11.927' South = By The Bay (NSW, Australia) S33° 55.022' East = First Landing (Fiji) E177° 24.811' West = Gone But Not Forgotten (Hawaii) W157° 52.278'

I think TB27B may be the travel bug with the highest actual mileage (currently 315,515 miles). It's a personal travel bug. My highest mileage "free range" travel bug is TB281. It has logged 14,585 miles to date.

I responded to a similar inquiry a couple years ago. Here was my answer then: 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. _____________________________________________ This definition still works for me two years later.