DragonflyTotem

Since you live in Richmond, and as that is only a couple of hours from the beach (where I am), I'm going to offer this one up for what it's worth: get to the ocean. I have had poison ivy several times when younger. Once I got it really bad just before we headed to Florida for vacation. I was pretty disappointed to be told that I shouldn't go swimming. So I had to limit myself to just wading in the ocean, but got some sea water up high enough on my legs that it hit some of the rash. The next morning everywhere the sea water had hit the rash, it was gone. So I went all the way, and the same thing happened and all of my rash was gone overnight. In the past 25 years or so of living here I have only been exposed to it twice and each time I went immediately to the beach to swim, and never got the rash. Take it for what it's worth, whether it makes sense or not, but you're close enough that for the investment of a few hours of time it could be worth it. Anyone else ever try swimming in the ocean and found similar results???

The first one you put out should be #100, then count down from there. The promise of having to return to the same spot 98 more times after they retrieve the first two and see the countdown might discourage them. Almost -- do all of that, but then somewhere in the middle randomly put out one as #200 or #847 or whatever. Help to give them that genuine feeling of hopelessness. :-)

Thanks for all the replies and confirming my own sense, and I'm going to go with that!

Thanks for mentioning that -- I checked and there are definitely other local caches with the same month/year placement date!

An interesting approach would be to file a complaint against his blog with blogspot. They have guidelines about illegal activity being posted in blogs and I'd think that if the cachers had permission to place the caches in these areas then removing them is likely illegal/unlawful in some way (theft of property at the least, I'd think). This would seem to fall into the same category as those who blog about spray painting SUVs and things like that, and those blogs have been pulled for the same reason.

Yes, and that was very much my own thought on this (that it was more important that it would be a different cache if I replaced the container) and am hoping that I was headed the right direction with that thought.

I'm finding myself in a situation where a cache that I adopted has been muggled and I need to do something. The original cache was placed 3.5 years ago (just under 180 total logged visits) and it was a unique container. I think that my options are to either try to come up with a replacement container --or-- archive the cache. If I come up with a replacement container it won't be the same cache...the best that I can do is create something that is sort of (possibly) in keeping with the original CO's theme/intent. Or I guess that I could simply put out a different container altogether and revise the description. But that has me thinking that perhaps it might be better to just archive the cache, then create a new one with a totally different container and put it there or nearby. I do hate to loose the cache "history" of a cache that has been out there for 3.5 years and all that...and for those who've found it, not sure if the location/placement had more meaning or if it was the unique container (or does anyone even care about that stuff?) so I guess that I'm asking for advice from those who have found themselves in a similar situation. Did you take your best shot at creating a similar replacement container or replace it with a totally different container or archive it and hide a new cache? Or is there another alternative that I haven't thought of? Thanks!

It may be kind of hard to ask Groundspeak about it as the reason given no longer applies. The log entry was: "Greetings! I see that you have already taken this cache to the Groundspeak forums and Keystone has explained that this is a clear case of "event stacking." It's clear that this flash mob event is planned as a "pre-event" for the nearby 10 Years! event and is not a separate event which stands on its own. For this reason, I cannot publish this event." But as I wasn't actually asked about it first, I didn't get a chance to remove the "pre-event" language which apparently shouldn't have been there, before it was archived. I did remove it once told, so it isn't there now. And so I think that the stated reason for the archive no longer applies.

So you're saying that the guidelines saying that "full weekend event that includes a geocoin trading session, a seminar and a potluck dinner" and your comment that "It will, for all intensive purposes, have the same attendees, and be nothing more than a relocation of the nearby Event by a short distance" means then that the same people cannot attend each of the events? I disagree though on an assumption that it will have the same attendees. I suspect that there will be those who do not want to attend an event in a restaurant and there will be those who would not want to attend a flash mob. However, it appears that since a different local reviewer has read this post and has already now archived the event that this discussion is no longer relevant. I agree with Keystone, that it appears that "stacking" is the problem. I believe this ruling is based on the following portion of the Guidelines: I believe that your Local Reviewer rightly concluded that there is no substantial difference between the nearby 10 Year! Event and your Flash Mob Event. It will, for all intensive purposes, have the same attendees, and be nothing more than a relocation of the nearby Event by a short distance. Since your Flash Mob is not running the entire weekend, that doesn't seem to be a relevant question to the original post. But yes, I have certainly seen Events that basically ran over a weekend (or longer) that had various components, all somewhat unique (BBQ one day, CITO the next, etc.). Good luck! (edit: splling)

I'm hesitant to reply as I suspect that it will end up heading things down a path that I didn't intend as I was simply looking for whether there was a rule that says: "Groundspeak does not believe that it is a good idea to have flash mob events that same day as the 10 year events" But about your comment regarding event stacking and the guidelines about events standing alone -- your comment doesn't make sense to me, given the guidelines (which doesn't as far as I can see even address "event stacking"). Are you suggesting that an event that would/could run a whole weekend, but that if you want to have multiple event listings you can only do so if they are separated by some predetermined distance (you suggested 50 miles)? I read the guidelines and get as an understanding that if an event at a specific location wants to run for a full weekend, that each event has to stand on its own. I see nothing there to suggest that they cannot be at the same location. Am I missing that somewhere there? I think that if I've read the guidelines correctly, that the planned flash mob event exactly fits the guidelines because the 10th anniversary rules prohibit flash mobs as events and so that event has to stand on its own, meeting guidelines for an event. Right? I don't see anything in the guidelines then that would preclude the event. "Time-honored concepts" aside, I thought that you were held to listing guidelines?

I know that Groundspeak will not recognize a flash mob as an official 10th Anniversary event. But have they said that they will not allow other events that just happen to be held the same day? Obviously I have a reason for asking so may as well lay that out -- I want to host a flash mob event on May 2nd. There is a planned 10th Anniversary event that will be a couple of blocks away from the flash mob event. The flash mob event was to be held first, with it ending prior to the 10th Anniversary event, and encouraging everyone attending the flash mob event to then disperse from there to go attend the anniversary event. And the flash mob event doesn't in any way indicate in its description that it is a 10th Anniversary event. I have that event in the queue for approval but last night saw that a local reviewer accidentally archived the 10th Anniversary event based on saying that "Groundspeak does not believe that it is a good idea to have flash mob events that same day as the 10 year events" because "if that were the case there could be events all day long." The local reviewer then unarchived the 10th Anniversary event (so that was fixed) but I assume that note was actually intended for my planned event as the note indicated that was the reason for accidentally archiving it (but my event hasn't been reviewed yet). So I'm assuming that what's next is to not approve my planned event. And again, the two events are not at the same time and also there are no other flash mob events being held here during either of the anniversary dates. The location is nearby the official event, but that's only because that's where the local GC group has held previous flash mob events. And just in case it makes a difference, the host for the 10th Anniversary event has said that he doesn't have a problem with the flash mob event being held prior to the anniversary event. I can't find anything that would indicate that the flash mob event can't be held then, only the note about a flash event not being able to be a 10th Anniversary event (which this isn't planned to be). That just doesn't seem to be something that Groundspeak would do -- claiming May 1st & 2nd can only be for official anniversary events. I'm wondering if the local reviewer has misunderstood something that Groundspeak has put out. So my question is whether there is something that Groundspeak has put out that precludes having other events on the same day as 10th Anniversary events???

I'd be interested in hearing more down the road as to how well it holds up for you. I've already thought of this one myself, but had rejected the idea without trying it because my past experience with shrink wrap tube is that it gets to be quite brittle when subjected to the cold and it will crack. I did a career in Navy electronics and we used that stuff all the time, but seldom if ever were able to use it outdoors for that reason. And by cold, I'm talking anything below freezing. So if you were in a warmer climate I think that it could be a workable idea, but I'd have my doubts anyplace else and so would love to hear back from you after you've given it a go. :-)

hhmmm , A sure fire way to be sure everybody reads it thoughly Yup, and that's why I hadn't done that yet as I wondered if that would prompt folks to read the entry to find the clue that they might have missed. See, that's why I ask the question here. Good sanity check as you all come up with the same thing that I do.

That's a good idea and along the line of what I was thinking about doing. Was hoping that might be an easier way to handle it rather than ticking them off trying to get them to understand.

I would shoot them an email, nicely asking them to edit their log. Either that, or just wait for it to scroll off the page. I know this one guy well enough that I can talk to him in person...but I happened to talk with a few other local cachers this weekend and they'd mentioned that they all know that he does this and apparently had said something to him. He's a real nice guy, just seems to be clueless about his entries being huge tip-offs.

I've noticed that there are a few cachers in my area that leave too much information when they post their "found it" log entry. An example would be in the case of a nano left in a park on a particular object - like a kids rocking thingie and they leave an entry that says something about having a "whale of a time" (the rocking thing was a whale). And along with that then log entries go from folks leaving DNFs to suddenly they're all the "quick and easy grab" variety. So obviously the "whale" example directed people to the right specific location. My question is -- when you have this happen, do you leave the log entry stand as it is? It's not even encrypted. What do you do if/when this happens to one of your caches?

Idiots. Rude, inconsiderate idiots. This is about the cache that I'd referred to above -- last week while I was out of town a cacher took it upon himself to go ahead and move the cache. Despite the cache description which said that it was available from the sidewalk and without having to go on to the property, a cacher decided that he apparently knew better than I did about where to locate my cache so he went ahead and moved it from that location to another location well inside the property (not at all findable from the sidewalk). And then he actually posted a log entry to say that he'd gone ahead and moved the cache. (Footnote: This is a cacher who placed a cache about 20 feet from a school's playground, and then defended that -- still active cache!) Meanwhile the property manager said that he came out and found one cacher trying to yank on the sprinkler head -- of a working sprinkler which happened to be in the vicinity of GZ (but not at it), and later found another about waist deep inside of a hedge (broke branches, etc.). All most likely caused by the cacher who decided that he had a better location for my cache -- and that then caused others (who shouldn't have done what they did) to frantically do the damage they did. So I just now removed the cache and will have to deactivate the listing while I try to decide what if anything I can still do...and then find out if the property owner will even consider letting me try something else.

Thanks for the reply Brad! I'd already seen that method of doing it...and if I could get him to would much prefer that method myself. But it's been somewhat difficult to get him to move forward on this as he's lost any interest in caching and spends his time doing other things and hasn't even logged in for a year now. As it was I had to sort of track him down because of wanting his permission to replace a damaged container (to prevent muggling and children issues), and that took nearly a month. So it would be unlikely that I'd be able to get him to do the dozen or so caches that way. That's why I was asking about typical times....already assuming that this isn't a high priority for GS, but just want to know at what point should I worry that perhaps the request has been lost.

I'm trying to help out a cacher who is no longer able to maintain his caches and as they are all located near me I offered to adopt them. As he has multiple caches he sent in email from his account email address authorizing the adoption and received a ticket number. That's been 12 days ago and neither of us have heard anything else. So my question is -- does anyone have a feel for what the typical time-frame is to hear from GS? The current CO has been really tough to reach and I've had to follow-up on this with him for about a month to get him to send out the email and now don't want it to fall into the rabbit hole.

Everything I've heard gave the 60CSX with the SirF III chip an edge in accuracy over the Garmin Colorados and Oregons. Garmin is no longer shipping the 60CSX with the SiRF III and is instead using a MTK II chip in the 60CSX. I haven't heard much yet about the newer units and how they compare with the older ones with the SiRF III/ I stand corrected on the chip then as I must have been looking at old review specs and didn't know that I got the new chip. But to me the chip was the less important as to me the antenna is what probably makes all the difference. My experience is that a nice big outside of the case quad helix antenna is probably going to perform a whole lot better than a case internal ceramic antenna. According to Garmin the Oregon's ceramic antenna is neither a quad helix nor a traditional patch antenna, which doesn't tell you much about what it is. And Oregon doesn't support any external antenna either.

I now have both the Garmin 60CSx and Garmin Oregon 550T. I've had the Oregon for almost two months now and find that I have lots of problems with it and in many cases my iPhone is more accurate. Specifically I get a lot of "bounce" with it and it will be pointing as much as 50-75 feet away from the cache. I suspect that this has a lot to do with the ceramic antenna that the 550T has while the 60CSx has a quad-helix antenna, but the 60CSx also has the older chip which many swear by. I decided to consider getting the 60CSx because at one cache site where I was having problems with the 550T someone else had their 60CSx and had no problems at all. Right after that I happened to have an opportunity to cache two sites with someone else -- same situation in that their 60CSx was dead-on and my 550T was so far off that I wasn't getting within 50 feet of the cache. Then I went to one cache site and couldn't get a good GPS reading and got a DNF only to have someone that I know uses a 60CSx come along and say they had no problems and that the GZ coordinates were dead-on. After researching the 60CSx and learning about both the antenna and chip difference, that was enough to convince me to get it. I plan on using my 60CSx for caching and regret having purchased the 550T.

Okay, I did it. Put out a cache, and also put out some bait. I put out a mini bison sort of near the actual cache and have a log in it which clearly says, "Congratulations on not finding the cache! First to Fail (FTF): " and then spaces to sign. No Groundspeak logo or language, just a plain slip of pager with the above note. And this morning...yupper. Got one. Signed the log, name, date and time and then posted to the online log to take credit or the FTF. Since he was an hour later asking for a clue on another one of mine, I gave that and then forwarded him a pic of his having signed a bogus log and let him know that he didn't find the cache.

VA Beach is? Hmmm, that's not that far from me. I have some vacay let. Hmmm...honey, we're going to VA. Y'all come on down, lots of caches to go around here! I on the other hand am headed to Tampa next week and hope to get some caching in before the light fades each day!

I get your point but to be clear that's not what I meant nor was it what I was doing. In an urban area like this you're going to be hard pressed to find places with zero muggle activity. For mine I was talking of two kinds of situations (specific caches actually) where in one case the object that I placed it behind gave a natural screening from any muggle that might be looking so putting it on the other side would then "force" someone to do it where/when someone may well be looking. That just seems like common sense (yeah, have heard about that not being very common and some not having much sense) to not put it back on the exposed side. And in the case of the frisbee golf...we have lots of shared usage things here --- schools that share parking lots and land with parks, frisbee golf courses that have walking trails. So if you ruled all of those out you'd lose a lot of great spots -- especially since they tend to be places that many people wouldn't have otherwise gone to so you're bringing them to a new place. In the case of the frisbee golf the issue was that despite posting that you might not be able to get to this cache during peak frisbee golf hours, someone went ahead and got seen by muggles (evidenced by their log entry saying they got hit in the head with a frisbee!). So to me that seems to be akin to a cache that says it is available at night and the description suggests doing it after hours...then it's probably not the wisest to go ahead and do it in the middle of the day just because you want to log the find. Just seems to make sense to me to actually follow the CO's provided information.

I understand... I was just making an appeal to the comment about premium member who pay enough to care (paraphrase.) This is not directed toward you, personally. It was brought up in another post as well. I was offended the first time I tried to open a cache page and it said it was for "Premium members only." I was just making a general appeal to all cachers to please not practice this strategy. Sure $30/year isn't much, but everyone's tight right now. And I'm not convinced that it is going to sift out any of the trouble makers. In the end for this situation though it would seem that it really doesn't make a difference. I've gone back over my logs and the only people who have been finding my caches are all premium members anyway.