Grunriese

Seems it would cost GC more to remove benchmarks than to keep them. What's the business case for removing them? If there's one thing that really annoys geocachers, it's features that get removed (like locationless caches, which eventually came back; virtual caches, which came back; and challenge caches, which disappeared completely screwing up everyone's stats).

I'm game, sounds interesting, but somewhat elitist being limited to one finder. What about the new cacher? Who's going to hide one for him so he can get the icon (although it does offer up an opportunity to welcome newbies)? And why would someone put a whole lot of effort into hiding a Lab Cache that can only be found once? Great idea for someone proposing, but the way my wife feels about geocaching, I'm afraid she might hide one for me with divorce papers instead of a proposal. Hopefully I have some geo-friends who will hide one for me.

That's quite right. Around my area 99% of them are . And I hate it when someone logs on my hides "... there was no plastic bag, so I used one to protect the container ..." aaaaaaggggggggg I laughed when I read this post. I spent 3.5 weeks in Northwest Spain, and it seemed that all the small/regular caches were hidden wrapped in plastic bags that were disgusting to handle. I had to wear gloves (good thing I brought them).

Don't know about the 62s, but that menu option on the 450 is for the list of caches, and has nothing to do with what is shown on the map. The map only shows a little green box for caches. No name, no GC code, just the icon. Very frustrating.

I've been trying to figure out the same thing on my Oregon 450. It's really a pain not being able to see the cache name. Yet another feature on my old 60CSx that is not on the Oregon? If there's a way to display the names, please let us know. Also, is there a way to increase the icon size?

The South Jersey event has been published (GC1W66B). As far as I know, this is the only morning 999 event. Because this is on a weekday, just after school starts, JoenSue will be hosting an evening event as well (GC1W66C, waiting to be published). Like AtlantaGal, I have a 999 Bookmark as well, with 18 events so far. As a side note, to the best of my knowledge South Jersey hosted the first event of this type back in 2005, when almost 50 cachers showed up at 5AM for breakfast! The event peaked at about 150 in 2007, which was on a Saturday. This will be the fifth straight year for this event. Over 80 folks attended last year on a Friday. Even for a Wednesday morning, there are already 15 folks signed up after only two days being listed!

You might think that, but you'd be wrong. The reason I was searching the forums was because I was experiencing the problem, and was wondering if anyone else was. I have better things to do than imagine problems. BTW, sorry about the multiple posts. Must have been hitting the refresh button.

I've always had the problem of the compass pointer being useless within 100+ feet of GZ (or at least recently), but now that you mention it, it does seem to be worse with 3.90. I have to completely ignore the arrow and just determine which direction causes the distance to go down instead of up. Re-calibrating the compass helps, but does not fully solve the problem. Moving versus standing still does not help either.

I've always had the problem of the compass pointer being useless within 100+ feet of GZ (or at least recently), but now that you mention it, it does seem to be worse with 3.90. I have to completely ignore the arrow and just determine which direction causes the distance to go down instead of up. Re-calibrating the compass helps, but does not fully solve the problem. Moving versus standing still does not help either.

Just read through this thread, and noticed no one has complained that their 60CSx now takes longer to acquire satellites when turned on, after "upgrading" to 3.90, but it sure seems to take a lot longer for me. Anyone else experience this?

Both Cerebral Codex and Choreographed Chaos are very difficult caches, puzzle-wise, terrain, and number of field trips required to complete. They are both in the Pinelands of South Jersey. Figure on a few months of effort for each unless you have the time to spend on a regular basis. Most stages are the equivalent of a 5x5 cache, and there are 10 stages plus the final.

Not sure how long this URL will be good for, as it's MapQuest's beta site, but go to http://beta.mapquest.com and enter the location of your first cache. I haven't been able to figure out how to enter coordinates, so you might have to improvise. Then click on the "Itinerary" tab on the left, and in the "Add Next Location" field, add your next location. Repeat for all locations. MapQuest draws a route for you, along with directions, but you have to pick the order. Note that all the old MapQuest links in gc.com are now invalid. If you click on a MapQuest link on a cache page, go up into the address bar and change the "www" in the URL to "atlas" and it will work.

Note that MapQuest just changed their URL if you plan to map by coordinates. You need to change the "www" in the old URL to "atlas" (e.g., http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?... becomes http://atlas.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?...). Kind of annoying that they would change the URL, but they've upgraded their website, and I guess that's "progress." Now all we need is for GC to update their web pages with the new MapQuest URLs.

Sorry, if you went hiking with your boy's Cub Scout den, and didn't have your GPSr with you, you're just a part-timer.

I've been by here many times years ago when I lived in North Jersey. If you're going to make a trip out of this, I'd be interested. But no sunrise trips, please. I'm 2+ hours south of here. I drove around here on Christmas day recently. Looks like a lot of new stores going up in the area.

If this is the real issue, then why not add a new feature where a cache can be labeled as "unallowable location" when archived. That way, when cachers view archived listings, they can clearly see that the area the cache was hidden in is off limits. I have to imagine that this represents a rather small percentage of archived caches.

Updated #8 below to reflect Cedar Grove Seekers' comment.

FTF is one of those things that doesn't really exist in the rules, but everyone recognizes anyway, like putting $500 on Free Parking in Monopoly as a "First To Land" prize. Since GC doesn’t keep track of FTFs, but many individuals do, it becomes a personal thing until someone claims "I have more FTFs than you do." Personally, when caching with others, I think of it this way – if there's an FTF prize of $100 in the cache, would I feel compelled to share it with anyone? Would anyone else have a claim on a share? What did they contribute to the find (other than keeping me company)? My boss used to say "Opinions are like butts – everyone has one, and they all stink." That said, I present “Grünriese’s FTF Guidelines,” my personal guidelines for claiming an FTF (where a "cacher" is a single person or a team sharing the same account; a "finder" is the first cacher to spot the cache; and a "retriever" is the person who first lays hands on the cache). 1. For simple caches (not multis), someone usually finds and physically retrieves the cache first – so no shared FTF. 2. If a multi, and another cacher finds at least one of the stages, it's a shared FTF for those who found one or more stages. 3. If for any reason the finder requires the assistance of a retriever, it's a shared FTF. 4. If, by prior agreement, two or more cachers team up and agree to split the effort (e.g., one paddles the boat, one solves the puzzle, one climbs the tree, etc.), it's a shared FTF (the key here is that one cacher would not have found the cache – on this search – if not for the help of his co-FTF cachers). 5. Merely assisting in a search does not justify a shared FTF, even if the first to find feels generous. FTFs are earned, not gifted. 6. Two cachers who spot the cache simultaneously (e.g., an exposed cache or a very obvious hide) should share the FTF rather than argue who spotted it first or making it a race, pushing & shoving, to the cache. Hopefully, this is by mutual agreement. 7. FTF must sign the log to prove he was there. If you can't (e.g., no log, no pen, etc.), then leave something unique behind or make some kind of mark and note it in your posting as proof you were there. You can't prove someone wasn't there, you can only prove you were there. No log entry/mark/token/photo/etc., no find. 8. If someone else signed the cache logbook before you, you are not FTF, even if the first person never posts the find or doesn't have an account. 9. No fractional FTFs – each shared FTF counts as one. 10. The cache owner is the final arbiter for contested FTFs, but hopefully it never goes that far, and folks don't take the game that seriously. Remember, it is just a game. There are no FTF Police, so police yourself, and have fun.